THE   HELLENIC   ORIGINS  OF 
CHRISTIAN   ASCETICISM 


UC-NRLF 


11M 


BY 


JOSEPH  WARD   SWAIN,  A.M. 


SUBMITTED  IN  PARTIAL  FULFILLMENT  OF  THE  REQUIREMENTS 

FOR  THE  DEGREE  OF  DOCTOR  OF  PHILOSOPHY 

IN  THE  FACULTY  OF  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY 


NEW  YORK 

1916 


EXCHANGE 


THE  HELLENIC  ORIGINS  OF 
CHRISTIAN  ASCETICISM 


BY 


JOSEPH  WARD   SWAIN,  A.M. 

t\ 


SUBMITTED  IN  PAKTIAL  FULFILLMENT  OF  THE  REQUIREMENTS 

FOR  THE  DEGREE  OF  DOCTOR  OF  PHILOSOPHY 

IN  THE  FACULTY  OF  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY 


NEW  YORK 

1916 


PRESS  OF 

THE  NEW  ERA  PRINTING  COMPAC 
LANCASTER.  PA 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS 
INTRODUCTION  .................................       1 

PART  I:   EARLY  GREEK  ASCETICISM 

CHAPTER  I.     Asceticism  in  Early  Cults  ...........        6 

1.  Poverty  of  sources,  6. 

2.  Purity  and  pollution:  necessity  of  purity  for  those  who 

would  approach  sacred  things,  8;  special  purity  de- 
manded of  priests,  8;  sources  of  impurity,  10. 

3.  Purifications,  private  and  public,  13;   in  certain  great 

festivals,  Anthesteria,  Thargelia,  Thesmophoria,  14; 
ascetic  rites  required  for  purification,  19. 

4.  Mysteries  of  Eleusis,  20;    long  preparation  for  initia- 

tion, which  required  purity,  21;  purifications  during 
the  mysteries,  22;  especial  purity  of  priests,  23, 
which  demanded  celibacy  and  other  ascetic  acts  of 
some,  24. 

5.  Ideas  of  purity  and  impurity  at  the  bottom  of  Greek 

asceticism,  25;  cases  of  individual  ascetics,  26. 

CHAPTER  II.     Asceticism  in  the  Orphic  Movement  ...     29 

1.  General   religious   development   in  the   eighth  to   sixth 

centuries,  29;  Dionysos,  30. 

2.  Orphism,  origins,  31;  doctrine,  33;  dual  nature  of  man, 

35;  original  sin,  35;  eschatology,  36;  purity  the  goal 
of  the  Orphics,  37;  their  ascetic  methods  for  acquiring 
it,  37;  essentials  of  Orphic  asceticism,  38. 

3.  Pythagoreanism,  nature  of  movement,  40;  asceticism,  41. 

4.  Empedocles,  relations  with  Orphics  and  Pythagoreans, 

43  ;  asceticism  in  his  rule  of  life,  45. 

5.  Activity   of   the   early   philosophers   and   sophists,    46; 

first  use  of  the  word  do-^ais,  47. 


CHAPTER  III.     Asceticism  in  Plato  ...............     48 

1.  Recapitulation  of  asceticism  in  early  Qreece,  48. 

2.  Sophists  and  their  importance  for  Plato,  50;  aristocratic 

nature  of  Plato,  51;  love  for  Athens,  51;   hatred  of 
sophism,  52;   debt  to  Orphism,  53,  and  sophists,  54. 

iii 


336065 


IV 

3.  Plato,  main  points  in  his  philosophy,  55;  real  existence 

of  ideas,  55;  dual  world,  56;  dual  man,  56;  fall,  57; 
Orphic  nature  of  doctrine,  57;  progress  and  attain- 
ment of  purity  through  philosophical  speculation,  58. 

4.  Plato's  asceticism:    Plato  did  not  hate  the  body,  60; 

but  did  consider  the  mind  much  loftier,  61;  philos- 
ophers should  disregard  things  of  the  body,  62 ;  essence 
of  Plato's  asceticism,  64. 

5.  Platonic  asceticism  with  later  thinkers,  65. 

PART  II:    ASCETICISM  IN  THE  GR.ECO-ROMAN  WORLD 

CHAPTER  IV.     Religious  Asceticism   67 

1.  Eeligious  history  of  Greece  after  Alexander:  establish- 

ment of  new  cults;  importation  of  oriental  re- 
ligions, 67. 

2.  Continuation  of  asceticism  in  Greek  cults,  68. 

3.  Asceticism  in  oriental  religions,  69;   how  important  for 

Greek  thought,  69;  ascetic  nature  of  the  oriental  re- 
ligions, 70;  asceticism  in  special  cults:  Cybele,  72; 
Attis,  74;  Adonis,  75;  Mithra,  76;  Isis,  77. 

4.  Gnostic    asceticism,    79;    combination    of    oriental    and 

Greek  asceticism,  80;  asceticism  of  great  Gnostics,  81. 

CHAPTER  V.     Ethical  Asceticism 84 

1.  Else    of    Ethical    Schools,    84;    distinguished    from    re- 

ligions and  philosophies,  85. 

2.  Cynicism,  (a)  early  cynicism,  85;  renunciation  of  goods 

of  civilization,  86;  asceticism  in  early  Cynicism,  88; 
(6)  revival  of  Cynicism  under  the  Koman  Empire,  89; 
typical  Cynics,  Peregrinus,  90;  Demonax,  92;  Epicte- 
tus's  ideal  Cynic,  93;  Musonius  Eufus,  97. 

3.  Neo-Pythagoreanism,    98;    resemblance    with    Cynicism, 

98;  Pythagorean  rule,  99. 

4.  Popular  ascetical  teachers  without  a  school,  Dion  Chry- 

ostom,  99;  Seneca's  early  training,  100. 

5.  Origins  of  this  asceticism,  101;   development  of  Greek 

asceticism,  102;  oriental  influence,  102. 

CHAPTER  VI.     Philosophical  Asceticism 104 

1.  Importance  of  ascetic  ideals  in  the  philosophy  of  the 
day,  104;  Stoicism:  early  Stoics  not  ascetics,  105;  Posi- 
donius  gives  cosmological  background  for  later  as- 
cetics, 106. 


2.  Seneca:   typical  of  his  age,  109;   his  philosophy  based 

on  theories  of  the  transitoriness  of  things,  110;  and 
the  eternal  value  of  the  soul,  111;  importance  of  rea- 
son, 112,  and  the  soul,  112;  life  of  philosopher  opposed 
to  that  of  vulgar  man,  114;  struggle  required  of 
philosopher,  115;  baseness  of  body,  116;  wickedness  of 
world,  117;  value  of  philosophic  retreat,  118;  value  of 
ascetic  discipline,  119;  excessive  austerities  condemned, 
120;  essence  of  Seneca's  asceticism,  120. 

3.  Minor    philosophies    of    the    period:    Philo,    121;    Neo- 

Pythagoreans,  123. 

4.  Neo-Platonism,  essence  of,  124;  Plotinus,  126;  his  ascetic 

life,  126;  his  philosophical  doctrine:  distinction  of  in- 
telligible and  sensible  worlds,  127;  matter  mark  of 
sensible  world  and  of  evil,  128;  Universal  Soul  in  man, 
129;  fall  of  man,  130;  flight  from  world,  132;  insuffi- 
ciency of  civil  virtues,  132;  insignificance  of  worldly 
goods,  133;  loftiness  of  intellectual  life,  134;  contem- 
plation and  ecstacy,  135;  asceticism  in  Plotinus,  137; 
Plotinus 's  successors,  139. 

CONCLUSION  . .   143 


THE  HELLENIC  ORIGINS  OF  CHRISTIAN 
ASCETICISM 


IlSrTKODUCTION 

For  many  years,  and  particularly  since  the  appearance  of 
Havet's  Le  Christianisme  et  ses  origines,1  and  of  Harnack's 
monumental  Lehrbuch  der  Dogmengeschichte,2  and  the  pub- 
lication of  Hatch's  celebrated  lectures  on  The  Influence  of 
Greek  Thought  and  Usages  upon  the  Christian  Church,3 
scholars  have  realized  that  the  origins  of  Christianity  are  to 
be  sought  in  the  Greek  world  even  more  than  among  the  Jews, 
and  that  the  Greek  philosophers  were  the  fathers  of  Christian 
theology,  rather  than  the  Hebrew  prophets.  In  recent  years, 
and  particularly  since  the  advent  of  the  twentieth  century, 
large  numbers  of  special  studies  have  appeared  in  which  the 
dependence  of  the  early  Christians  upon  the  Greeks  of  their 
day  is  clearly  set  forth :  it  is  shown  that  in  their  special  doc- 
trines, such  as  those  concerning  salvation,  redemption  and 
immortality,  as  well  as  in  their  cosmological  and  moral  theo- 
ries, the  Christians  did  not  differ  materially  from  many  of 
their  contemporaries.  Up  to  the  present,  however,  no  study 
has  been  made  of  the  origins  of  Christian  asceticism  from 
this  point  of  view.  Scholars  have,  of  course,  been  aware  that 
at  the  period  of  the  rise  of  Christian  asceticism,  there  was  a 
considerable  movement  in  the  same  direction  in  the  Greek 
world,  and  have  correctly  inferred  that  it  exercised  a  certain 
influence  upon  budding  Christian  asceticism.  Moreover, 
scholars  have  attempted  at  times  to  account  for  certain  fea- 

1  Paris,  1872-1884. 

2  Freiburg,  1886  (1  ed.). 

3  Hibbert  Lectures,  1888. 

2  1 


tures  of  Christian  asceticism  by  invoking  Greek  parallels: 
Zeller  tried  to  explain  the  ascetic  movement  among  the  Chris- 
tians of  the  first  centuries  as  a  survival  of  Cynicism  ;4  many 
years  later  Weingarten  attempted  to  derive  Christian  mo- 
nasticism  from  an  ascetic  cult  which  he  had  found  in  the 
temple  of  Serapis  at  Memphis;5  B-eitzenstein,  approaching 
the  subject  from  the  point  of  view  of  comparative  literature, 
has  more  recently  shown  the  influence  which  the  contempo- 
rary aretologies  had  upon  the  early  stories  of  Christian 
monks.6  But  these  writers  have  only  dwelt  upon  certain 
sides  of  the  subject:  if  they  attempted  to  generalize,  as  Wein- 
garten did,  and  held  that  they  had  discovered  the  true  and 
only  source  of  Christian  asceticism,  their  conclusions  were 
wholly  false.7  The  trouble  was  that  there  has  been,  up  to 
the  present,  no  rounded  picture  of  the  asceticism  of  the  Greeks 
at  the  time,  and  consequently  when  scholars  noticed  resem- 
blances between  early  Christian  ascetics  and  the  Cynics,  or 
the  recluses  of  the  Serapeum,  or  some  other  special  cult,  they 
at  once  concluded  that  they  had  found  the  source  of  the 
Christian  ascetic  movement,  for  they  completely  ignored  the 
other  Greek  forms  of  asceticism  then  prevalent.  It  is  the 
purpose  of  the  present  study,  then,  to  attempt  to  draw  such 
a  picture  of  Greek  asceticism  as  will  enable  others  to  see  to 
exactly  how  great  an  extent  the  Christians  were  dependent 
upon  the  Greeks  for  their  ascetic  ideas  and  ideals;  it  is  the 
intention  to  give  a  rounded  picture  of  Greek  asceticism  in  the 
various  forms  in  which  it  appeared  at  the  time  of  the  spread 
of  Christianity.  But  no  attempt  will  be  made  to  show  how 
these  ideas  were  transferred  into  Christianity,  or  to  write  of 
early  Christian  asceticism :  that  would  be  too  large  a  subject, 

*  Eclecticism,  p.  303. 

s  Der  Ursprung  des  Monchtums  in  nachconstantinischen  Zeitalter  (1877). 

•  Hellenistische  W under  erzahlung  en  (1906). 

i  For  a  scholarly  criticism  of  these  various  theories,  though  from  an 
orthodox  Catholic  point  of  view,  see  Leclercq,  in  Dictionnaire  d'Arche- 
ologie  chretienne,  art.  ' '  Cenobitisme. " 


for  it  would  require  a  careful  study,  not  only  of  Greek  asceti- 
cism and  early  Church  history,  but  also  of  Judaism  and  the 
many  oriental  religions  which  were  prevalent  in  the  Koman 
Empire ;  it  is  impossible  to  maintain  that  all  Christian  asceti- 
cism was  of  Greek  origin.  But  it  seems  that  by  this  collec- 
tion of  material  for  the  strictly  Greek  asceticism  in  the  Ro- 
man Empire,  a  contribution  will  be  made  to  a  future  History 
of  the  Origins  of  Christian  Asceticism. 

Though,  as  has  been  stated,  there  is  as  yet  no  rounded  pic- 
ture of  Greek  asceticism,  the  subject  is  not  a  wholly  new 
one.  In  recent  years  a  number  of  scholars  have  been  study- 
ing the  subject,  particularly  in  its  early  and  more  primitive 
phases ;  these  scholars  have  quite  succeeded  in  breaking  down 
the  old  classic  theory  of  Greek  life  which  taught  that  there 
was  no  place  for  ascetic  rites  in  Greece,  at  least  in  the  pre- 
Hellenistic  period.  It  used  to  be  said  that  in  Homeric  days 
the  land  was  filled  with  fighting  nobles  who  found  only  the 
greatest  pleasure  in  life  and  war,  who  had  no  time  for  pessi- 
mistic or  melancholy  thoughts,  and  whose  religion  was  one 
of  joy  and  gladness,  giving  no  place  to  other- worldliness,  and 
that  in  later  times  this  same  optimistic  world-view  continued ; 
therefore  the  Greek  people  are  to  this  day  associated  by  many 
persons  with  all  that  shows  harmony,  serenity,  reasonable- 
ness and  joy  in  life.  It  may  very  well  be  the  case  that 
Greek  thought  and  religion  were  characterized  to  an  eminent 
degree  by  just  these  qualities — but  they  were  not  the  only 
ones.  After  the  recent  studies  of  a  large  number  of  scholars, 
including  Miss  Harrison,8  Earnell,9  Wachter,10  Fehrle,11 
and  others,  the  old  view,  represented  by  Zockler,12  who  dis- 
missed Greece  with  a  few  pages  in  his  general  history  of 

s  Prolegomena  to  the  Study  of  the  Greek  Religion  (1903). 
»  The  Evolution  of  Religion  (1905) ;  Cults  of  the  Greek  States  (1896- 
1909). 

10  Reinheitsvorschriften  in  griechischen  Kult  (1910). 

11  Die  Tcultische  Keuschheit  im  Altertum  (1910). 

und  Monchtum  (1898). 


asceticism,  is  now  completely  untenable.  These  scholars 
have  made  it  perfectly  clear  that  ascetic  tendencies  did  exist 
in  Greece  from  very  early  times,  but  they  too  give  only  par- 
tial pictures  of  Greek  asceticism:  they  have  concerned  them- 
selves only  with  the  early  and  so-called  primitive  religions 
of  Greece.  Wachter  and  Fehrle,  to  be  sure,  whose  studies 
are  little  more  than  compilations  of  Greek  texts  and  inscrip- 
tions, have  covered  the  later  periods,  too,  but  their  works  give 
none  of  the  higher  developments  of  Greek  ascetical  thought. 
But  it  is  just  these  higher  developments  that  are  important 
for  the  student  of  early  Christianity,  for  it  was  with  them 
particularly  that  the  early  Christians  came  in  contact.  Up 
to  the  present,  these  higher  developments  have  not  been 
studied  at  all.  In  the  present  study,  therefore,  attention  will 
be  directed  particularly  to  them.  As  they  cannot  be  under- 
stood without  some  knowledge  of  the  forms  out  of  which  they 
evolved  and  upon  which  they  rested,  it  will  be  necessary  to 
devote  an  introductory  chapter  to  the  asceticism  of  the  early 
cults ;  but  as  these  lower  forms  have  already  been  well  stud- 
ied, this  introductory  chapter  will  be  based  largely  upon  these 
other  studies.  These  primitive  forms  of  asceticism  consti- 
tuted the  substratum  upon  which  later  development  was 
based,  though  they  remained  almost  unaltered  during  the 
whole  course  of  Greek  history:  in  the  closing  period  of  the 
Greek  world,  Jamblichus  shows  that  ideas  were  then  preva- 
lent which  are  also  found  in  the  early  stages  of  Greek  history ; 
therefore  a  strictly  chronological  study  is  not  essential,  and 
the  leading  ideas  may  be  illustrated  from  authors  in  the 
various  periods  of  Greek  history.  At  a  very  early  date, 
however,  development  upon  these  elementary  notions  did  be- 
gin ;  in  the  second  chapter,  therefore,  attention  will  be  devoted 
to  these  developments,  particularly  as  found  in  Orphism, 
Pythagoreanism  and  some  of  the  early  philosophers.  In  the 
third  chapter  a  careful  study  will  be  made  of  the  asceticism 
of  Plato;  it  will  be  seen  that  his  thought  upon  the  subject  is 


merely  an  exquisite  exposition  of  the  doctrines  developed  by 
his  more  obscure  predecessors.  These  three  chapters  will 
constitute  the  first  and  introductory  part  of  the  study;  they 
will  set  forth  the  essential  elements  contained  in  Greek  as- 
cetic thought.  The  second  part  of  the  study  will  be  devoted 
to  the  different  phases  of  the  asceticism  of  the  later  Hellen- 
istic age,  which  was  contemporary  with  early  Christianity. 
This  second  part  is  therefore  the  central  part  of  the  study, 
but  it  will  readily  be  seen  that  a  knowledge  of  the  earlier 
period,  and  particularly  of  the  thought  of  Plato,  is  absolutely 
indispensable  to  an  understanding  of  the  later  part.  Also 
the  influence  which  Plato  had  directly  upon  many  Christians, 
such  as  Origen,  was  very  great. 


PAET  I 
EAELY    GEEEK    ASCETICISM 


CHAPTEE  I 
ASCETICISM  IN  THE  EAELY  CULTS 

In  taking  up  a  study  of  early  Greek  asceticism,  it  must  be 
constantly  borne  in  mind  that  the  literary  sources  for  this 
side  of  the  Greek  religion  are  not  all  that  might  be  desired. 
Homer  has  nothing  to  say  of  asceticism,  and  very  little  to  say 
of  purifications  in  general.1  This  silence  is  probably  due  in 
part  to  the  fact  that  Homer  represents  a  different  set  of  reli- 
gious ideas  than  those  contained  in  the  Minoan  religion; 
Homer  was  Aeolic,  or  Indo-European,  but  it  seems  that  most 
of  the  rites  of  this  purifying  nature  were  of  Ionic,  Attic, 
Minoan  origin.2  At  a  later  period,  Aeschylus  did  take  up 
this  tradition  and  spoke  considerably  of  purification,  which, 
as  will  presently  appear,  is  at  the  basis  of  all  asceticism,  but 
he  never  carried  his  ideas  to  ascetic  extremes.  The  other 
classic  authors  have  even  less  to  say  on  the  subject:  a  few 

1  Gilbert  Murray  has  supported  a  contrary  view  in  his  Eise  of  the 
Greek  Epic,  pp.  123-4,  pointing  to  the  fact  that  Homer's  heroes  let 
their  hair   grow  long  during  the  siege  of  Troy,  and,  referring  to  the 
unquestionable  Jewish  parallel  custom,  he  assumes  that  this  was  "the 
visible  sign  of  various  abstinences,"  including  one  from  women.     But 
Andrew  Lang,  in  his  World  of  Homer,  pp.  132ff.,  denies  any  such  ab- 
stinences, showing  that  the  Greeks  let  their  hair  grow  long  all  the  time, 
and  did  not  abstain  from  women   during  the  siege.     "Homer  knows 
nothing  of  taboos." 

2  Lang,  p.  134:  "These  rites  (of  purification)  are  Ionic,  Attic,  and, 
in  historic  Greece,  are  Hellenic,  also  Asiatic.    They  make  an  inseparable 
barrier  between  Homeric  and  Ionic  religion. ' ; 

6 


hints  can  be  picked  up  from  the  other  dramatists  and  the 
orators,  but  that  is  all.  Nor  is  this  surprising  when  we  re- 
member that  this  literature  was  written  largely  to  entertain ; 
if  too  much  were  said  of  sin  and  punishment,  of  pollution, 
purification  and  penance,  it  would  be  disagreeable  and  out  of 
place  here.  It  should  be  remembered,  therefore,  that  the 
classic  Greek  literature  gives  only  one  side  of  the  Greek  reli- 
gion— and  this  is  not  the  side  which  interests  the  present 
study.  Recent  epigraphical  discoveries  have  opened  up  a 
mine  of  new  materials  for  the  student  of  the  Greek  religion, 
but  unfortunately  most  of  the  inscriptions  which  have  been 
published  are  of  late  date:  very  few  indeed  which  relate  to 
this  subject  antedate  the  fifth  century,  while  the  majority 
come  only  from  Hellenistic  times.  The  study  of  ancient 
vase-paintings,  too,  has  shed  much  light  upon  new  phases  of 
Greek  religious  life  and  thought.  But  after  all,  one  of  the 
main  sources  of  information  for  the  early  Greek  cults  remains 
the  writers  of  the  Alexandrian  period.  Antiquarians  of  this 
epoch  are  the  ones  who  have  passed  down  most  of  what  is 
known  of  the  early  Greek  religion.  The  early  Fathers  of 
the  Church,  too,  such  as  Clement  of  Alexandria,  have  pre- 
served much  valuable  material.  But  the  difficulties  under 
which  the  Alexandrians  worked  are  obvious.  All  that  they 
could  possibly  know  was  the  cults  as  they  existed  in  their 
time ;  the  persistency  of  such  cults  is  well  known,  however, 
and  it  is  extremely  probable  that  they  continued  to  exist 
for  many  centuries  without  undergoing  any  fundamental 
change.  In  the  case  of  the  Fathers  of  the  Church,  it  must  be 
remembered,  too,  that  they  were  trying  to  show  how  foolish 
such  beliefs  and  practises  were,  and  consequently  they  were 
not  very  sympathetic  observers ;  but  on  the  other  hand,  it  is 
also  a  fact  that  they  were  writing  for  pagans  who  were  well 
acquainted  with  all  these  things,  and  must  have  known  that 
if  they  misrepresented  them  too  violently,  they  would  merely 
discredit  themselves  with  their  readers. 


8 

But  taking  the  materials  as  they  are  given,  let  us  see  what 
ascetic  tendencies  we  can  find  in  early  Greece. 

From  the  earliest  times  of  which  there  is  any  record,  the 
Greeks  possessed  certain  ideas  of  purity  which  they  expressed 
by  the  word  a<yvelay  and  of  stain,  which  they  designated  by 
pfao-pa,  and  of  purifications  which  one  so  polluted  had  to 
undergo,  and  which  were  called  KaQap/jioi.  Now,  if  anyone 
wished  to  enter  a  temple,  or  perform  a  sacrifice,  or,  in  fine, 
enter  into  relations  of  any  sort  whatsoever  with  the  gods,  he 
had  to  be  pure  (ayvds).  Thus  Hesiod  said,  "  being  purified 
and  pure,  offer  sacrifices  to  the  immortal  gods  "  ;3  inversely, 
Homer  made  some  one  say,  "  I  am  afraid  to  pour  out  strong 
wine  to  Zeus,  while  having  unwashed  hands."4  Moreover, 
everything  connected  with  the  act  had  to  be  pure.  Thus 
Achilles  purified  the  cup  before  pouring  a  libation  to  Zeus.5 
The  things  sacrificed  had  to  be  pure.  Euripides  made  Iphi- 
genia  say  to  her  brother,  whom  she  had  been  ordered  to  sac- 
rifice, "  we  shall  say  that  it  is  not  permitted  to  sacrifice  you 
to  the  goddess,  as  you  are  not  pure."6  Plutarch  remarked 
that  "  a  thing  to  be  sacrificed  must  be  pure  in  both  body  and 
soul,  and  be  unharmed  and  uncorrupted."7  The  whole 
thing  is  well  summed  up  in  an  inscription  coming  from 
Astypalaia :  "  No  one  may  enter  the  temple  who  is  not  pure."8 

Injunctions  of  purity  were  particularly  strict  for  priests. 
Exceptional  purity  was  demanded  of  those  who  entered  the 
temple  every  day  and  who  handled  the  sacred  things;  they 
had  to  take  unusual  care  not  to  pollute  themselves.9  In  the 
first  place,  they  had  to  keep  away  from  forbidden  things, 

3  Op.  336f.:    K<x5  5'  epSeiv  Up   Mavdrouri  0eoi<riv  ayvws  teal  Ka6apu>s. 

*  11.  Z  266f . :  Xepo-i  5'  avlTrroiaiv  Atl  Xe^etv  at6oira  olvov  <5tfo/*at.  Cf .  Hes. 
Op.  724. 

5  II.  H  228. 

«  Eur.  IpJi.  Taur.  1035ff. :  'flsov  flouts  <reX^£o/uej'#vetj'0e£  . .  .  ovKa6apbv'6vra. 

i  Plut.  de  def.  orac.  49. 

8  ['E]s  rb  lepbv  (JLTJ  tfftpireiv  8<rri$  fj,rj  ayv6s  fort.  Numerous  other  texts  are 
given  in  Th.  Wachter,  Eeiriheitsvorschriften  in  griechischen  Kult,  esp.  §  1. 

»  Wachter,  pp.  12ff.  and  passim. 


such  as  corpses,  but  that  was  not  all :  a  life  of  complete  purity 
was  required.  Thus  Plato,  in  the  Laws,  said  that  one  chosen 
priest  should  be  scrutinized  "  first  as  to  whether  he  is  of 
sound  body  and  legitimate  birth;  and  in  the  second  place, 
in  order  to  show  that  he  is  of  a  perfectly  good  family,  not 
stained  with  homicide  or  any  other  impurity  in  his  own  per- 
son, and  also  that  his  father  and  mother  have  led  a  similarly 
unstained  life."10  Pausanias  said  of  the  priests  and  priest- 
esses of  Artemis  Hymnia  in  Orchomenos,  "  they  are  required 
not  only  to  be  pure  from  sexual  intercourse  and  other  things 
during  their  whole  lives,  but  they  do  not  have  baths  and  other 
like  things,  nor  do  they  enter  the  houses  of  individuals."11 
The  ancient  interpreters  of  the  oracle  at  Dodona,  the  Selloi, 
were  apparently  forbidden  to  sleep  in  beds  or  wash  their 
feet.12  The  Greeks  were  particularly  insistent  upon  the 
sexual  purity  of  priests.  There  were  innumerable  cults 
which  demanded  the  absolute  chastity  of  the  priest  or  priest- 
ess; sometimes  this  obligation  was  extended  to  others  who 
were  not  priests,  but  who  had  some  function  to  perform  in 
the  cult  notwithstanding.  Apollo,  having  charge  of  purity 
himself,  was  supposed  to  be  particularly  careful  about  this 
matter.  He  was  supposed  to  inspire  Pythia  by  entering  her 
through  the  sexual  organs,  wherefore  absolute  chastity  was 
required  of  her.13  Cassandra  was  another  of  his  virgin 
priestesses;14  others  are  mentioned  in  Thebes  and  Epirus.15 
Virgin  priests  and  priestesses  are  also  mentioned  for  Diony- 
sos,  Herakles,  Zeus,  Artemis,  Athene,  etc.16  It  is  therefore 
obvious  that  priests  had  to  be  doubly  careful  to  keep  away 

10  Plat.  Leg.  VI  759c. 

11  Paus.  VIII  13,  1. 

12  C.    H.   Moore,   Greek   and   Roman   Ascetic    Tendencies,   in   Smyth, 
Harvard  Essays  on  Classical  Subjects,  p.  102. 

is  Origen,  c.  Cels.  VII  3. 

i*  Eur.  Troad.  41ff. 

is  Paus.  IX  10,  4;  Aelian,  Nat.  An.,  11,  2. 

is  Cf .  Fehrle,  pp.  75-126. 


10 

from  polluting  things :  at  times,  this  led  to  a  veritably  ascetic 
mode  of  life. 

Certain  of  the  Olympian  gods  were  thought  to  have  special 
care  for  purity.  In  Pallas  Athene  we  find  a  goddess  who 
concerned  herself  with  all  sorts  of  interests,  and  especially 
with  intellectual  ones,  and  who  was  a  virgin  and  pure.  Vir- 
gins were  placed  under  her  protection,17  and  she  was  even 
called  "the  Pure"  and  athe  Purifier."18  In  the  cult  of 
Apollo  particularly,  attention  was  given  to  purity,  as  was 
just  pointed  out ;  this  was  because  it  is  he  who  had  charge  of 
all  things  connected  with  purity,19  as  his  very  name  shows. 
Liddell  and  Scott  say  that  he  was  called  Phoebus  because  of 
the  purity  and  radiant  beauty  of  youth;  Miss  Harrison  re- 
marks that  the  epithet  has  more  to  do  with  purity  than  radiant 
beauty.  The  root  of  the  word  meant  "  in  a  condition  of  cere- 
monial purity,  holy  in  a  ritual  sense."20  Plutarch  says, 
"  the  ancients,  it  seems  to  me,  called  everything  that  was  pure 
and  sanctified  Phoebic,  as  the  Thessalians  still  say,  I  believe, 
of  their  priests  when  they  are  living  in  seclusion  apart  on  cer- 
tain prescribed  days  that  they  are  living  Phoebically."21 

ITow  just  what  did  this  purity  consist  in  ?  What  was  it 
that  made  one  impure  ?  Wachter  gives  an  immense  number 
of  texts,  taken  from  the  Greek  authors  and  inscriptions, 
which  show  the  sorts  of  things  which  polluted  a  person. 
With  the  single  exception  of  murder,  none  of  the  things  for- 
bidden are  what  we  would  call  moral  faults  at  all :  they  are 

17  Herod,  iv,  180. 

is  'Ayvd,  Schol.  ad  Ar.  Nub.  967;  Ka^o-ios,  Aesch.  Eumen.  578. 

is  But  it  is  not  true  that  Apollo  was  always  a  perfect  model  of  purity 
himself;  cf.  Eur.  Ion,  436ff.,  where  he  is  roundly  denounced  for  his 
"misdeeds"  and  told  that  if  he  does  not  reform  he  will  not  have  money 
enough  to  pay  his  fines. 

20  Harrison,  p.  394. 

21  Plut.  de  El  apud  Delph.,  xx,  1 :  (froifiov   dt  drj  TTOV  TO  Ka.6a.pbv  K.CU  ayvbv 
ol   iraXaiol    irav  wvb^a^ov  &>s  crt  Qe<r<ra\oi  rot/s  ieptas  kv  rats  airo(t>pa,(Ti.v  -f)/j.£pais 
afarotis  t<p  eavruv  c£w  diarpiftovras  of/iwu  <t>oifiovoij.€i<r6a.i  \kyovai. — cf.  Harrison, 
p.  394. 


11 

merely  ritual  faults;  they  are  quite  similar  in  character  to 
the  taboos  of  the  most  primitive  peoples  known  to  us  to-day. 
The  causes  of  pollution  given  in  Wachter's  work  are  (1)  child- 
birth; a  woman  lying-in  was  impure,  as  were  all  who  came 
in  contact  with  her,  the  child,  and  even  the  house ;  in  some 
cases  this  impurity  lasted  for  forty  days,  and  special  rites 
were  required  for  purification;  (2)  a  woman  during  men- 
struation was  impure;  (3)  certain  diseases,  especially  in- 
sanity, demanded  purifications;  (4)  a  corpse  was  impure,  as 
was  anyone  who  approached  one ;  a  man  had  to  purify  him- 
self after  attending  a  funeral,  while  certain  priests  could  not 
be  present  at  one  at  all;  (5)  every  murderer  was  impure,  not 
only  because  of  the  approach  to  a  corpse,  but  also,  as 
Wachter  maintains,22  through  the  /uW/*a  of  the  soul  of  his 
victim,  which  followed  him;  (6)  certain  animals  were  im- 
pure, so  that  their  flesh  might  not  be  sacrificed  or  eaten;  in 
different  cults,  swine,  goats,  sheep,  cattle,  horses,  asses,  deer, 
dogs,  birds,  fish,  etc.,  were  taboo  and  in  others  all  flesh  food 
was  forbidden;  (7)  in  some  cults,  certain  vegetables  were  for- 
bidden, such  as  beans,  lentils,  garlic,  onions,  mallows,  mint, 
apples,  ivy,  myrtle ;  also  wine ;  ( 8 )  iron  or  bronze  could  not 
be  brought  near  to  certain  sanctuaries,  nor  gold  to  others.23 
Of  course,  all  these  things  were  not  forbidden  to  all  Greeks ; 
many  of  them  were  confined  to  a  few  small  cults.  Neither 
were  they  all  contemporaneous.  All  that  can  be  said  is  that 
some  cult  has  been  found  in  Greece  at  one  period  or  another 
which  regarded  these  things  as  taboo,  or  as  they  said,  #709. 

But  even  here,  one  of  the  most  important  sources  of  pollu- 
tion is  not  mentioned:  in  fact,  this  source  was  so  important 
that  it  could  not  be  grouped  with  the  others,  but  had  to  be 
treated  in  a  separate  volume.  This  is  the  pollution  arising 

22  Wachter,  p.  64;  cf.  Rohde,  Psyche,  I  264,  n.  2;  275,  n.  2;  II  78,  n.  1. 

23  Large  numbers  of  texts  illustrating  the  nature  of  these  taboos  will 
be  found  in  Wachter,  op.  cit.,  pp.  25-118.     See  also,  Solomon  Reinach, 
Mythes,  Cultes  et  Religions,  I,  pp.  24ff.  Encyc.  Eel.  Eth.,  art.  " Birth," 
"Animals,"  etc. 


12 

from  sexual  intercourse,  which  is  dealt  with  in  Fehrle's  com- 
panion volume  on  ritual  chastity.24  The  regulations  in  re- 
gard to  this  were  due  to  a  vast  variety  of  causes,  including 
not  only  such  important  points  as  the  theories  in  regard  to 
the  organization  of  the  family,  but  also  the  wide-spread  belief 
that  the  union  of  men,  and  particularly  of  women,  with  the 
divine  was  effected  by  this  means  (for  examples,  Pythia  and 
several  of  the  mysteries25)  and  that  persons  who  had  been  so 
honored,  or  who  aspired  to  being  so  honored,  must  abstain 
from  such  unions  with  mortals.  But  it  is  also  undeniable 
that  from  the  earliest  times,  the  act  was  held  to  be  polluting, 
even  in  wedlock.26  Purifications  were  required  in  certain 
cases  before  a  person  so  polluted  could  assist  at  any  religious 
ceremony;  even  purifications  could  never  completely  wash 
away  the  stain,  however,  and  for  certain  rites  it  was  neces- 
sary to  have  little  girls  so  young  that  there  could  be  no  ques- 
tion of  their  absolute  purity. 

If  one  inquires  more  carefully  into  the  exact  manner  in 
which  these  things  were  supposed  to  be  polluting,  he  finds  that 
ideas  in  regard  to  evil  spirits  were  invoked  to  explain  it.27 
These  evil  spirits  were  in  early  times  thought  of  as  little 
winged  sprites  which  fluttered  about  and  were  always  anxious 
to  attach  themselves  to  people;  if  they  ever  succeeded,  their 
unhappy  host  was  sure  to  be  not  only  polluted,  but  also 
afilicted  with  disease  and  other  woes  untold,  until  they  were 
driven  off  again.  Sickness  was  a  sign  that  a  person  harbored 
such  evil  spirits,  which  probably  explains  the  injunction, 
mentioned  above,  forbidding  sick  persons  to  enter  a  sanc- 
tuary. So  he  was  doubly  unfortunate,  and  sometimes  the 

24  Die  Tcultische  Keuschheit  im  Altertum. 

25  Cf.  Origen,  c.  Cels.  VII  3;  Diodorus,  XVI  26;  Fehrle,  pp.  7ff. 
WTad(t>po8l<riaiuaivcit   Porph.    de   Abst.   IV    20.     Hesyeh.,    s.v.   ayvetciv. 

Ka.Bap€TL)€iv  cbr6  re  &(j>po5i<rlo)v  K.a.1  dirb  pe/epoO.  Cf .   Hes.   Op.   733ff .   Fehrle,  ch.  ii. 
27  See  Wachter,  pp.  2ff.;  Fehrle,  pp.  34ff.;  42ff.;   Harrison,  Prolego- 
mena to  the  Study  of  the  Greek  'Religion,  eh.  iv;   Bouche'-Leclercq,  in 
Diet,  des  Antiq.,  art.  ' '  lustratio. ' ' 


13 

positive  and  material  miseries  thus  occasioned  loomed  up 
larger  than  the  alienation  from  God.  At  the  very  end  of 
Greek  history,  Porphyry,  while  discussing  these  spirits,  wrote, 
"  because  of  them  are  purifications,  not  for  inducing  the  pres- 
ence of  the  gods,  but  in  order  that  these  things  may  keep 
away."28  But  it  is  certain  that  possession  by  these  spirits 
also  prevented  men  from  approaching  sacred  things.  How- 
ever, the  exact  way  in  which  the  pollution  was  explained  in 
the  mythology  is  not  so  important  for  the  present  study  as  is 
the  belief  that  it  existed,  and  had  to  be  washed  away.  What 
were  the  methods  by  which  this  was  accomplished  ? 

In  some  cases,  it  was  very  simple :  mere  washing  was  suffi- 
cient. Thus,  a  basin  of  water  was  placed  at  the  entrance  to 
the  temple,29  in  which  all  who  entered  were  supposed  to  wash 
themselves;  if  their  stains  were  not  very  great,  this  is  all 
that  was  demanded.  In  other  cases,  washing  in  sea-water 
was  required.  Thus  Iphigenia  tells  the  king  that  she  must 
take  the  statue  (which  she  is  really  planning  to  steal)  and 
the  two  polluted  prisoners  to  the  sea  to  wash  them  and  thus 
rid  them  of  their  pollution.30  We  shall  presently  see  that 
one  of  the  great  ceremonies  of  the  Eleusinian  mysteries  was 
the  "AXaSe  fivarai^  in  which  all  the  participants  purified 
themselves  in  a  lake  of  salt  water.  Sometimes  the  water  of 
mineral  springs  was  supposed  to  have  purifying  virtues  supe- 
rior to  those  of  ordinary  water.31  On  certain  occasions  the 
person  or  object  to  be  purified,  instead  of  being  washed,  was 
merely  sprinkled  with  water;  branches  of  laurel  or  olive 
trees  were  used  for  this  purpose,  just  as  the  holy-water 
sprinklers  are  used  in  the  Catholic  Church  to-day.  In  case 

28  Porph.  de  philos.  ex  orac.  haur.,  p.  149  (quoted  by  Euseb.  Praep. 
Ev.  IV  23,  3),  Kal  5iet  TOVTO  al  ayveiat,  oft  5tcb  TOI>S  6eotis  irpoa"r)yov(ji.£vus}  dXX'  lv 
oDrot  diroffTUHri.  The  whole  fragment  is  very  important. 

29"Waehter,  p.  7;  Diet,  des  Ant.,  art.  ' '  lustratio/ '  where  pictures  of 
such  basins  are  given;  cf.  art.  "labrum." 

30  Eur.  Iph.  Taur.  1193  :  0d\a.(r<ra  /cXtffei  irdvra  ravdpAiruv  /ca/cd. 

si  Gruppe,  Griechische  Mythologie-  und  Beligionsgeschichte,  p.  888. 


14 

a  more  thorough-going  purification  was  deemed  necessary, 
this  could  be  accomplished  by  fire;  it  was  done  by  fumiga- 
tion, frequently  with  sulphur.32  On  other  occasions  purifi- 
cation was  brought  about  by  contact  with  very  pure  things ; 
laurel  branches  were  used  for  this  purpose  in  the  cults  of 
Apollo,  and  olive  in  those  of  certain  chthonian  deities;  some- 
times the  blood  of  a  pig  was  used  for  this  purpose.33 

Such  were  the  sorts  of  purifications  which  were  demanded 
of  individuals  in  case  they  became  contaminated  in  any  way. 
Just  as  the  pollution  had  been  individual,  the  purification 
was  individual ;  the  polluted  person  might  require  a  little  aid 
in  the  ceremonies,  but  that  was  all;  the  purification  was 
strictly  an  individual  matter.  However,  there  were  other 
occasions  when  the  purification  was  collective :  all  of  the  citi- 
zens of  the  community  took  part  and  were  purified  together. 
In  such  cases  the  pollution  was  not  traced  to  the  fault  of  any- 
body, but  seems  to  have  been  due  rather  to  the  general  wear 
and  tear  of  time ;  at  certain  times  of  the  year  it  was  felt  that 
a  general  cleaning  up  and  driving  out  of  all  evil  spirits  was 
desirable,  so  special  rites  were  performed  with  this  end  in 
view.  One  such  time  was  the  early  spring  or  late  winter, 
just  as  the  new  life  was  beginning.  Another  was  the  time 
of  the  harvest  (which  comes  in  May  and  June  in  Greece). 
A  third  was  the  autumn.  At  each  of  these  times  there  was 
a  great  public  ceremony,  and  though  purification  was  not 
always  its  only,  or  even  its  most  prominent  motive,  elements 
of  this  nature  were  always  to  be  found,  and  were  in  all  prob- 
ability the  most  primitive  part.  Thus  in  the  Greek  month 
of  Anthesterion  (=  February),  came  the  Anthesteria,  which 
was  paralleled  among  the  Romans  by  the  ceremonies  in  con- 
nection with  the  februa,  or  purifiers  (whence  our  word  Feb- 

32  The  Greek  word  for  sulphur  is  deiov,  and  is  therefore  identical  with 
the  word  for  divine,  but  this  is  accidental;  it  is  supposed  that  the  word 
is  related  to     0tfw,    sacrifice.     See  Liddell  and  Scott,  s.vv.;  II.  II  228; 
Od.  x  481. 

33  Aeschyl.  Eumen.  283,  458ff. 


15 

ruary).  Later,  when  the  harvest  was  at  its  height  came  cere- 
monies such  as  the  Thargelia.  Finally  as  the  year  was 
dying  came  the  Thesmophoria.  In  all  of  these  feasts  there 
were  elements  of  purification,  though  in  classic  times  these 
were  frequently  overlaid  with  a  mass  of  other  rites.  In  her 
Prolegomena  to  the  Study  of  the  Greek  Religion,  Miss  Harri- 
son has  been  able  to  show  that  the  primitive  idea  back  of  all 
of  these  was  purification  and  the  placation  of  demons.  A 
consideration  of  these  festivals  is  well  worth  our  while,  there- 
fore, especially  as  their  cleansing  nature  has  been  so  fully 
established  by  Miss  Harrison  that  we  can  base  our  study 
upon  hers.34 

The  Anthesteria  was  a  feast  to  Dionysos.  It  lasted  for 
three  days,  the  llth  to  the  13th  of  the  month,  which  three 
days  were  known  as  Pithoigia  (cask-opening),  Choes  (cups) 
and  Chytroi  (pots).  The  three  days  were  given  over  to 
drinking,  revelling  and  rejoicing,  so  that  at  first  sight  every- 
thing seems  to  say  that  it  was  a  simple  wine  festival  in  honor 
of  Dionysos.  Nevertheless  a  certain  note  of  sadness  ran 
through  the  whole  ceremony,  which  should  lead  one  to  pause 
to  ask  if  it  was  really  such  a  simple  merry-making.  An  old 
proverb  preserved  by  Suidas  strengthens  this  doubt,  and 
gives  the  clue  to  the  real  interpretation  of  the  feast.  We  are 
told  that  to  those  who  were  constantly  demanding  a  repetition 
of  the  favors  formerly  received,  one  said,  "  Get  out,  Keres,  it 
is  no  longer  Anthesteria !  "  Keres  is  the  Greek  name  for  the 
little  sprites  of  which  we  have  already  spoken  as  causing  ill- 
ness, etc.  Suidas,  who  preserved  the  proverb,  says  that  "  in 
the  Anthesteria,  ghosts  are  going  about  the  city."35  This 
shows  us  that  originally  the  Anthesteria  was  an  All  Souls' 
Day.  The  scholiast  on  Aristophanes  quotes  Theopompos, 

34  Prolegomena,   etc.,   ch.   2-4,  pp.   32-162;    cf.   Diet,   des  Ant.   and 
Pauly-Wissowa,  Eeal-Encyclopddie  der  Tclassischen  Altertumswissenschaft, 
under  the  various  feasts;  A.  Mommsen,  Feste  der  Stadt  AtTien. 

35  Suid.  S.v.  06pa.fr  •  06pa.fr  /c^pcs,  ofo  £w  ' Av0€<rT^pta}  o>s  Kara,  T^V  ir6\iv  TOIS 


16 

who  said  that  at  this  feast  they  sacrificed  to  Hermes  Chtho- 
nios.36  The  lexicographer  Photius,  explaining  the  words 
luapa  vpepa,  "day  of  pollution,"  says  that  such  a  day  oc- 
curred "in  the  day  of  Choes  in  the  month  of  Anthesterion, 
in  which  they  believed  that  the  spirits  of  the  dead  rose  up 
again.  From  early  morning  they  used  to  chew  buckthorn 
and  anointed  their  doors  with  pitch."37  Buckthorn  was  a 
purgative,  and  would  therefore  drive  out  of  the  body  whatever 
evil  spirits  might  be  there;38  as  pitch  was  especially  pure, 
it  would  prevent  their  coming  into  the  house.  The  Anthes- 
teria,  then,  was  primarily  a  festival  of  purification  from 
spirits,  and  more  especially,  the  spirits  of  the  dead.  The 
whole  performance  was  but  one  example  of  a  general  form 
of  rite  to  which  the  Greeks  gave  the  name  eva^/ia-pos^  which 
was  intended  to  remove  the  stain  of  blood  from  a  man  and 
thus  purify  him  :  the  methods  used  were  washings  of  one  sort 
or  another,  and  sacrifices  ;  each  had  the  positive  effect  of  puri- 
fication.39 At  the  bottom  of  this  great  festival  of  Athens, 
therefore,  was  the  idea  of  pollution  and  purification;  as  we 
examine  others,  we  shall  find  it  in  them,  too. 

After  some  months  came  another  important  festival,  which 
was  known  as  the  Thargelia,  and  which  was  an  offering  of 
the  first-fruits  of  the  harvest.  This,  too,  seems  to  have  been 
a  time  at  which  purity  was  deemed  essential,  and  we  conse- 
quently find  that  a  considerable  part  of  the  ceremony  was 
devoted  to  its  acquisition.  Thus,  Diogenes  Laertius  says  in 
his  life  of  Socrates  that  "he  was  born  on  the  6th  day  of 
Thargelion,  the  day  when  the  Athenians  purify  the  city."4 

ssSchol.  ad  Ar.  Ban.  218. 

37  Photius  s.V.  fuapdi  i)/dpa'  kv  rots  Xovcrlv  '  AvdcffTypiuvos  fjirjvfa,  tv  <£  SOKOVVIV 
al  \f/vxo.l  rQ>v  TeXcvTirja'dvTajv  dvitvcu,  pd/Avq)  %b)6ev  £/Aa.<ru>t>TO  Kal  TT^TTTT?  rets  Qtipas 


38  Porphyry  speaks  of  evil  spirits  which   '  '  creep  into  those  making 
use"  of  impure  things  (eiVSi/yoj/res  ro?s  x/aw^ots),  de  phil.  ex    orac.  haur. 
149. 

39  For  these  tvayurfjial  iu  general,  see  Harrison,  pp.  55-76. 

40  Diog.  Laert.  ii  4. 


17 

They  did  this  through  persons  known  as  <f>apnatco{ :  Harpo- 
cration  remarks,  "  at  Athens  they  led  out  two  men  to  be  puri- 
fications for  the  city;  it  was  at  the  Thargelia;  one  was  for 
the  men  and  the  other  for  the  women."41  The  way  they  did 
this  was  to  take  some  person,  and  by  ritually  heaping  all  the 
impurities  of  the  city  upon  him,  to  make  a  scape-goat  of 
him:  he  was  pelted  and  driven  out  of  the  city,  and  the  im- 
purities went  with  him.  The  scholiast  on  Aristophanes  says 
that  "  the  pharmakoi  purified  the  cities  by  their  slaughter," 
and  then  goes  on  to  say,  "  for  the  Athenians  maintained  cer- 
tain very  ignoble  and  useless  persons,  and  on  the  occasion 
of  any  great  calamity  befalling  the  city,  I  mean  a  pestilence 
or  anything  of  the  sort,  they  sacrificed  these  persons  with  a 
view  to  purification  from  pollution  and  they  called  them 
purifications  (KaQdpna-ra)  ,"42  For  the  details  of  this  cere- 
mony, we  are  indebted  to  a  very  late  author,  Tzetzes  (A.D. 
1150),  who  incorporated  fragments  of  Hipponax,  of  the 
sixth  century  B.C.  He  says,  "they  gave  him  cheese  with 
their  hands  and  a  barley  cake  and  figs,  and  seven  times  they 
smote  him  with  leeks  and  wild  figs  and  other  wild  plants. 
Finally  they  burnt  him  with  fire  with  the  wood  of  wild  trees 
and  scattered  the  ashes  into  the  sea  or  to  the  winds,  for  a 
purification,  as  I  said,  of  the  suffering  city."43  Whether  or 
not  this  human  sacrifice  was  maintained  in  classic  times,  it  is 
hard  to  say ;  Miss  Harrison  thinks  that  it  was,44  but  this  view 
is  by  no  means  universally  accepted;  it  may  very  well  be 
that  he  was  merely  pelted  and  driven  out  of  the  city  and  for- 
bidden to  return.  At  any  rate,  the  rite  is  clearly  one  of 
purification,  behind  which  is  the  same  idea  that  is  found  in 
the  Christian  conception  of  the  atonement:  that  the  punish- 
ment of  one  may  purify  many  from  their  stains.  However, 
there  was  no  idea  of  an  angry  god  to  be  appeased,  nor  of  a 

4i  Harpocrat.  s.v.  0a/>/ia/c6s . 

42,Schol.  ad  Ar.  Eq.  1136. 

«  Tzetzes,  Hist.  23,  726ff. 

«  Harrison,  pp.  102ff. 

3 


18 

vicarious  sacrifice.  The  whole  thing  consisted  in  loading 
all  the  pollutions  upon  the  unfortunate  scape-goat,  and  then 
driving  him  out  of  the  city;  naturally  the  polluting  spirits 
went  with  him,  and  the  city  thus  became  purified. 

A  third  ceremony,  the  last  which  we  shall  study  here,  came 
in  the  fall,  and  was  known  as  the  Thesmophoria.  It  was  per- 
formed by  women  only.  Like  the  Anthesteria,  it  lasted  three 
days,  from  the  llth  to  the  13th  of  Pyanepsion  (=  October- 
November)  ;  these  three  days  were  known  as  the  Kathodos 
and  Anodos  (down-going  and  uprising),  Nesteia  (fasting), 
and  Kalligeneia  (fair-born  or  fair-birth)  ;  on  the  first  day 
women  who  had  already  been  purifying  themselves  for  nine 
days45  went  down  into  certain  clefts  or  chasms,  called  peyapa, 
taking  with  them  suckling  pigs,  which  they  sacrificed,  and 
bringing  up  the  remains  of  last  year's  pigs ;  during  the  second 
day,  these  remains  were  exposed  upon  the  altar,  while  the 
women  sat  about,  fasting;  on  the  third  day,  the  rotten  pig's 
flesh  was  mixed  with  seed  and  strewn  upon  the  fields.  The 
object  of  the  rite  is  obviously  to  promote  fertility:  to  this 
end  there  were  certain  other  rites,  in  connection  with  repre- 
sentations of  the  male  generative  organ ;  it  has  also  been  sug- 
gested that  the  squatting  of  the  women  on  the  ground  was  to 
permit  union  with  a  chthonian  deity,  which  had  been  pre- 
pared for  by  their  nine  days  of  continence  before  and  during 
the  feast.46  We  are  told  that  they  put  branches  of  a  purify- 
ing and  anaphroditic  virtue  on  their  beds.47  Of  especial  in- 
terest is  the  fasting,  for  this  is  the  first  time  we  have  come 
upon  this  popular  form  of  asceticism.  The  Stoic  Cornutus 
writes,  "  they  fast  in  honor  of  Demeter  .  .  .  when  they  cele- 
brate her  feast  at  the  season  of  sowing."48  Athenaeus  men- 
tions the  fast;49  one  of  the  Cynics  says,  "my  friends  are 

45  Ovid,  Met.  10,  431. 

46  Cahen  in  Diet,  des  Ant.,  art.  ^Thesmophoria/' 
4T  PHn.  His.  Nat.  24,  59. 

48  Cornut.  de  Theol.  28 
49Ath.  307ff. 


19 

keeping  a  fast  as  if  this  were  the  middle  day  of  the  Thesmo- 
phoria";  the  fast  had  thus  become  proverbial.50  A  votive 
relief  has  been  found  showing  a  procession  of  women  bring- 
ing gifts  to  the  Earth-mother,  who  is  crouching  upon  the 
ground  as  the  fasting  women  did  on  this  day.51  The  reasons 
for  this  fasting  were  undoubtedly,  first,  the  presence  of  the 
rotten  pig's  flesh ;  when  so  sacred  a  thing  was  present  it  would 
be  most  unbecoming  to  eat  profane  things;  and  secondly,  if 
a  worshipper  did  eat,  she  would  greatly  risk  getting  some 
evil  demon  on  her  which  would  incapacitate  her  for  taking 
any  further  part  in  the  ceremonies;  nine  days  had  been  re- 
quired to  attain  the  required  purity,  and  now  extra  precau- 
tions had  to  be  observed  to  retain  it.  It  is  remarked  in  the 
passage  already  quoted  from  Porphyry52  that  these  evil 
spirits  come  at  us  when  we  eat  and  thus  settle  upon  our 
bodies;53  so  if  one  wishes  to  remain  perfectly  pure,  he  had 
better  abstain  from  eating.  The  two  rites  are  obviously  for 
the  attainment  and  preservation  of  that  ritual  purity  which 
is  required  of  all  those  who  approach  sacred  things. 

Thus,  it  appears  that  in  three  of  the  most  important  reli- 
gious ceremonies  of  Athens,  great  attention  was  given  to 
ritual  purity.  It  had  to  be  acquired  by  means  of  positive 
acts,  which  demanded  not  only  the  time  and  attention  of  the 
person  to  be  purified,  but  also  entailed  a  certain  expense  (in 
case  of  a  sacrifice)  and  positive  renunciations ;  if  the  purity 
thus  acquired  had  to  be  maintained  for  any  length  of  time, 
this  could  be  done  only  through  further  privations  and  cere- 
monies. From  the  earliest  times,  therefore,  there  were  per- 
sons in  Greece  who  believed  that  purity  could  be  purchased 
only  at  the  price  of  real  asceticism. 

But  as  yet,  only  isolated  rites  have  been  described.     The 

so  Harrison,  126ff. 

si  Ibid.,  p.  127,  fig.  12;  cf.  Ath.  Mitt.  1899,  taf.  viii,  1. 
62  Supra,  p.  13,  n.  28. 

53  Porph.  de  philos.  ex  orac.  haur.  p.   149 :   Kai  yap  naKiara  rms  7roim$ 
rpo<£ms  -xaipovai,  anovukvuv  yap  q/z£p  Trpoffiaat  Kctl  irpo(ri£ai>ov<ri  TCJJ 


20 

same  tendencies  will  be  found,  however,  if  one  of  the  cults  is 
examined  in  its  entirety.  Let  us  take  the  mysteries  of 
Eleusis.54  These  formed  one  of  the  oldest  cults  in  Greece, 
and  survived  as  long  as  paganism  itself  survived.  As  they 
reach  back  into  hoary  antiquity,  modern  scholars  have  been 
led  to  suggest  that  they  were  perhaps  a  relic  of  the  old  agri- 
cultural life  of  the  Minoan  period.55  The  mysteries  were 
subsequently  taken  under  the  protection  of  the  city  of  Athens, 
which  of  course  added  enormously  to  their  dignity.  Their 
priesthood  became  more  important,  and  their  rites  were  so 
celebrated  that  they  were  sought  by  people  from  all  over  the 
world.56  In  Hellenistic  times  they  were  taken  as  one  of  the 
signs  of  the  unity  of  the  Greek-speaking  world.  Though  con- 
tinuing to  exist  down  to  the  very  end  of  Greek  civilization, 
they  underwent  but  little  development  after  the  seventh  cen- 
tury B.C.  ;  in  character  the  rites  always  remained  rather 
primitive. 

According  to  Isocrates,  the  mysteries  reminded  the  Atheni- 
ans of  the  two  benefits  which  they  had  received  from  Deme- 
ter,  the  goddess  to  whom  they  were  dedicated :  first,  agricul- 
ture, and  secondly,  the  initiation  which  gave  a  hope  of  a 
blessed  immortality.57  The  rites  had  originally  (if  we  are 
to  trust  modern  scholars)  the  purpose  of  increasing  the  fer- 
tility of  the  land  and  of  assuring  good  crops ;  participation  in 
them  assured  the  participant  of  a  happy  life  beyond  the 

54  The  best  book  on  the  mysteries  is  Foucart,  Les  Mysteres  d' Eleusis 
(1914).  Cf.  Harrison,  pp.  540-572;  Diet,  des  Antiq.  (art.  "Mysteres," 
"Eleusinia"). 

ss  Foucart,  eh.  iii,  and  pp.  248ff. 

es  Foucart,  pp.  263ff . ;  Diet,  des  Antiq. 

57  Isocr.  Panegyr.  28 :  [A^juTjrpos]  6060-775  Scopeds  Sirras  aiwep  neyio-Tm  rvy- 
X&vov<riv  ovffai,  TOVS  T€  KfxpTTovs,  ol  TOV  fJ.Tj  &r]pi(i)8&s  £T)V  i7JuSs  OUTIOI  yeybvaai,, 

KCcl  TTJV  Tf\eT7]V,   7}S  OL  H6T(X<rxbvT€S   TTepl  T€  TTJS    TOV  jStOU  TcXeUTTJS  KCtl  TOV  <TVfJ.Tr(Xl>TOS 

alowos  r]8lovs  rds  kXiridas  exovviv.  Cf .  Hymn,  in  Cer.  480—2 :  6X/3ios,  os  Tad 
oiraiirev  eirix&ovi&v  a^pcoTraw*  os  5*  dreX^s  tepcoi>,  os  r  aju/iopos,  oviroi?  o/xoiajr 
ctlactv  €%«  0??tpi«'6s  xep  UTTO  £6(f>(£  rjepoevTt..  Cf .  Aristoph.  Ban.  154-8,  448-459  ; 
Soph,  apud  Plut.  de  And.  Poet.  4;  Cic.  Leg.  II  14,  36;  Diet,  des  Ant., 
art.  "Eleusinia"  VIII,  "Les  mysteres  et  1'autre  vie." 


21 

grave.  The  ceremonies  consisted  in  a  dramatic  representa- 
tion of  the  myth  of  Demeter. 

There  are  two  points  in  which  these  mysteries  are  of  in- 
terest to  us,  first,  the  purity  required  of  all  who  sought  initia- 
tion, and  secondly,  the  higher  purity  demanded  of  the  priests 
during  the  period  of  the  great  mysteries. 

Only  those  were  admitted  to  the  initiation  who  had  under- 
gone a  certain  preparation.  In  the  first  place,  those  wishing 
to  be  initiated  had  to  go  through  the  "  lesser  mysteries  "  be- 
fore they  could  be  admitted  to  the  greater;  in  the  course  of 
these  preparations,  the  candidates  were  purified  and  washed 
in  the  Ilissos  Kiver.58  As  this  was  done  at  the  end  of  the 
month  of  Anthesterion,  it  was  over  six  months  before  the 
definite  initiation  took  place.  When  the  second  part,  or  the 
Grand  Mysteries,  arrived,  the  preparation  was  continued. 
First  the  candidates  were  instructed  in  the  myth  of  Demeter, 
without  a  knowledge  of  which  the  rites  would  be  unintelli- 
gible ;  as  this  was  kept  a  profound  secret  by  the  mystics,  only 
those  who  had  been  initiated  knew  it.  A  certain  interpreta- 
tion of  the  myth  was  also  taught.  But  the  main  point  was 
the  ritual  preparation,  which  was  much  more  complicated 
and  rigorous  than  anything  we  have  yet  seen.  At  the  very 
beginning  the  herald  forbade  "whoever  does  not  have  clean 
hands."59  Before  this  the  candidates  had  been  observing  a 
fast — which  purified  their  hands;  for  several  days  they  had 
taken  no  form  of  food,  so  long  as  the  sun  was  in  the  heavens. 
There  was  a  myth  that  while  seeking  her  daughter,  Demeter 
had  refused  all  food  and  drink  for  nine  days,  and  it  was  sup- 
posed to  be  in  memory  of  this  that  the  mystics  fasted ;  how- 
ever the  myth  is  clearly  aetiological,  that  is,  it  was  invented 

58  Polyaen.  Strat.  V  17:  T&V  'lXi<r<r6j>,  ou  rdv  Kodapubv  reXoOo-t  rots  eXArroat 
AiwrTTjpiois.     Schol.  ad  Ar.  Plut.  845 :  Ian  rd  fjuicpa  [pvarripia]  &<nrcp  TrpoKadctp- 
<m  Ktxi  Trpoayvewns  rCav  nfy&Xuv. 

59  The  exact  formula  is  preserved  by  Theon  of  Smyrna,  p.  22 :     Td  nif 

ti '  6<ms  rets  x*ipa$  A")  KCtdap6s. 


22 

afterwards  to  explain  the  rite,  and  not  vice  versa.60  They 
were  especially  strict  about  certain  foods;  the  mystagogues, 
or  teachers,  were  constantly  saying,  "  If  you  eat  this  or  that, 
you  are  not  pure/761  Among  the  things  specially  forbidden 
were  a  kind  of  shark  (7aXeo?),  mullet  (epvdplvos},  crayfish 
(icdpapos),  a  certain  sea-fish,  "black  tail"  (pekdvovpos),  red 
mullet  (rpfy\r]);  at  least  some  of  these  were  foods  especially 
sought  after  by  the  Greeks  of  the  fourth  century.62  But  for 
a  variety  of  reasons,  they  were  held  to  be  impure,  so  could 
not  be  eaten  by  those  who  wished  to  be  pure.63 

It  was  on  the  15th  of  Boedromion  that  they  assembled  at 
Eleusis,  and  the  herald  made  the  proclamation  mentioned 
above.  On  the  following  day  took  place  the  most  important 
rites  of  purification,  which  went  under  the  name  of  "  a\a$e 
fjivo-Tai"  "  to  the  sea,  mystics,"  the  shout  which  accompanied 
the  principal  ceremony.  The  mystics,  who  had  returned 
from  Eleusis  the  day  before  and  were  then  at  Athens,  went 
and  purified  themselves  by  washing  in  the  sea,  and  by  sacrific- 
ing a  pig  previously  purified  by  immersion  in  the  sea.  The 
blood  of  these  animals  was  considered  a  most  powerful  agent 
of  purification,  for  it  was  thought  to  attract  all  the  evil  spirits 
irresistibly  and  to  hold  them.64  Each  person  had  to  have  a 
pig  of  his  own;  thus  the  purification  was  individual,  but 
being  performed  simultaneously  by  the  whole  group,  was  the 

eo  However,  Foucart  (p.  284)  here  as  always  insists  that  the  mytho- 
logical interpretation  is  the  true  one.  Of  course  he  is  correct  in  saying 
that  they  explained  their  fasting  by  the  myth;  but  the  real  reason  why 
they  fasted  was  because  it  was  customary,  and  because  they  thought 
that  the  act  gave  positive  virtues,  etc.;  they  later  invented  or  adapted 
the  myth  to  explain  their  acts. 

«i  Cf .  Liban.  Corinth,  p.  356 :  nal  i8la  TTO.\LV  TO  A  TOV  nai  TOV  j  el  rovSe 
^yeuerco,  ov  Kadctpos  irapei,  Ktxl  TroAXi)  TOVTOV  irapa  rots  juuerrafycoyoTs  eTrtjueAeia. 

«2  Foucart,  p.  287. 

es  Thus  the  shark  was  thought  to  be  impure  because  it  laid  its  eggs 
by  the  mouth,  the  black-tail  because  it  ate  disagreeable  food  which  other 
fish  did  not  eat;  on  the  other  hand,  they  abstained  from  red  mullet 
because  of  its  fecundity,  which  they  honored,  etc.,  cf.  Foucart,  p.  285. 

e*  Foucart,  p.  294. 


23 

more  powerful.  The  bodies  of  these  pigs  were  then  burnt 
and  the  ashes  scattered.  During  the  fifth  century,  a  feast  in 
honor  of  Asklepios  was  introduced  into  the  ceremony  which 
retarded  the  return  to  Eleusis  by  two  days.  As  the  purity  of 
the  participants  had  to  be  maintained  all  this  time,  unusual 
precautions  were  necessary.  The  mystics  could  not  appear 
in  public,  but  shut  themselves  up  in  their  houses,  giving  them- 
selves over  undoubtedly  to  fasting  and  abstinences;  it  was  a 
veritable  retreat.65 

It  has  been  inferred  by  some,  from  the  aetiology  of  the 
Homeric  Hymn  to  Demeter,  that  there  were  other  rites  of 
purification,  at  least  for  children,  which  consisted  in  passing 
through  fire ;  but  there  is  little  positive  evidence  for  this.66 

A  further  point  which  has  been  urged  is  the  meaning  of 
the  word  mystery  itself.  The  ancients  related  the  word  to 
fjLvco,  "  I  shut  my  eyes  and  ears  and  lips,"  so  mysteries  were 
things  secret  and  not  talked  about.  However,  Miss  Harrison 
suggests  a  better  derivation.  She  connects  it  with  the  word 
/iuo-o?,  a  pollution,  and  makes  the  "  mystery  "  a  ceremony  of 
purification  from  pollution.  Lydus  makes  the  same  sug- 
gestion :  "  mysteries,"  he  says,  "  are  from  the  taking  away  of 
a  pollution  (pvcros)  as  equivalent  to  purification."67  At  any 
rate,  it  is  clear  that  purification  was  an  essential  element  of 
the  mysteries. 

In  addition  to  this  purity  of  those  to  be  initiated,  there  was 
a  higher  grade  which  had  to  be  attained  by  the  priests. 
Arguing  from  a  passage  in  Pausanias,  some  have  maintained 

«s  Foucart,  p.  295 ;  Aristot.  Constit.  Ath.  56. 

ee  Harrison,  pp.  156ff . ;  F.  B.  Jevons,  Introd.  to  the  Hist,  of  Eel.,  ch. 
xxiv  app. 

67  Harrison,  p.  154.  Lyd.  de  mens.  IV  38:  nvvTrjpia  &ir6  TTJS  vTepfaews 
TOV  nv<rovs  &vrl  Trjs  ayioarvvrjs.  Cf .  Clem.  Al.  Protr.  ii :  nwTrjpia  .  .  .  CLTTO  TOV 
o-uju/Se/SrjKoros  ircpl  TOV  kibvvaov  nvaovs.  "  'Mysteries'  (ought  to  be  de- 
rived) from  the  pollution  relating  to  Dionysos."  Cf.  Eur.  Suppl.  470: 
\vaavTct  (reuva  VTCHHCLTUV  and  El.  87 : 


24 

that  an  absolute  celibacy  was  required  of  them.68  We  have 
already  seen  that  similar  demands  were  made  upon  the 
priests  and  priestesses  in  various  other  cults,  but  it  is 
not  certain  that  it  was  an  absolute  demand  in  this  case. 
Quite  the  contrary,  we  have  an  inscription  from  Eleusis 
which  is  the  dedication  of  a  votive  offering  raised  to  a  hiero- 
phant  by  his  wife.69  This  came  from  the  first  century  B.C., 
so  if  Pausanias  is  right,  the  celibacy  requirement  is  a  later 
addition.  What  is  more  probable  is  that  continence  was  im- 
posed upon  the  priests  for  the  period  of  the  mysteries  only. 
At  any  rate,  it  is  clear  that  at  least  this  much  was  required, 
so  we  may  say  that  a  special  purity  was  demanded  of  the 
priests.70  These  special  restrictions  for  the  clergy  are  better 
shown,  however,  in  the  class  of  priestesses  known  as  the 
iepeicu  Travayefc.  The  few  literary  sources  which  we  have 
show  us  that  they  were  celibate  and  lived  in  common.71  A 
story  of  the  legendary  epoch  depicts  them  united  in  a  banquet 
after  the  sacrifice.72  When  the  sacred  objects  were  taken 
from  Eleusis  to  Athens,  it  was  they  who  carried  them  during 
the  crossing  of  the  Bheitan  lakes,  according  to  a  decree  of 
421.  73  On  other  circumstances,  they  were  associated  with 
the  hierophant  and  under  his  direction,  as  during  the  proces- 
sion of  the  Kalamaia.74  At  Eleusis  they  dwelt  in  houses 
belonging  to  the  Two  Goddesses  (Demeter  and  Kore)  and 


«8  Speaking  first  of  other  mysteries,  he  says  (II  14)  :  lepo^avr^  Se  OVK  h 
rbv  fttov  Travra  diroSeSencrm,  Kara  8e  €Ka<rTr}v  reXer?)?  aXXore  kanv  aXXos  afyiaiv 
alp€r6s,  Xaju/Savcoj',  fjv  et?eX#,  Kal  yvvouna.  Kal  ravra  8ia<f)opa  r&v  kv  'EXewu/t 
po/ufown,  TO.  8e  es  avrfiv  rr\v  TeXcvTrjv  eKtlvcov  tariv  cs  p-i^fftv. 

69  'lepo^avlrrjv]  Mez/efcXleiS?^  Beo^/iou  Kv8]adi)vaita  vj  yvvfj.  —  Bull,  de  COTT. 
Tiellen.,  1895,  p.  128;  Foucart,  p.  173. 

TO  Cf  .  Arrian.  Dissert.  Epict.  Ill  21  :  ofc  fadrjTr)  cx«s,  rjv  Set  TOP  lepo^av 
rr)p,  .  .  .  ovx  fjyvfVKas  o>s  emws.  ("Ayvos  here  is  castus). 

TI  Hesych.  :  Tlavayeis  '  '  Adf]vr]<ri  iepeuxi  '  Itpeia  ^rts  ou  niayerai  avSpi.  Bek- 
ker,  Anecd.,  p.  212  :  0,705  Kal  TO  rlniov  Kal  a£iov  o-e/SdorAiaroj  e^  ou  at  icpetat 
bvayeis  Kal  ayr)  TO.  nvffTJjpia  Kal  aXXa  TIV&.  p.  330:  e£  ou  Kal  iepetai  Travaycls. 

73  Demo,  f  rg.  1,  in  Didot,  F.H.G.  I  378. 

73  Ath.  Mitt.,  1894,  p.  163. 

7*  C.  I.  A.  IV,  p.  122. 


25 

were  supported  at  their  expense.75  They  were  not  ordinary 
priestesses,  but  rather  resembled  a  religious  community  de- 
voted to  the  Two  Goddesses.  Some  have  recognized  in  them 
the  Bees  (MeXuro-ai)  of  which  Porphyry  and  several  gram- 
marians speak.76  At  any  rate  they  represent  the  nearest 
approach  to  a  genuinely  ascetic  life  which  is  to  be  found 
in  early  Greece. 

The  various  facts  which  we  have  set  forth  are  amply  suffi- 
cient to  prove  that  ideas  of  pollution  and  purity  are  to  be 
found  in  the  Greek  religion  at  all  the  stages  of  its  develop- 
ment. It  is  perfectly  certain  that  the  Greeks  had  the  idea 
that  there  were  some  things  which  were  incompatible  with 
the  gods,  and  which  therefore  could  not  be  brought  into  con- 
tact with  anything  which  pertained  to  the  gods.  And  not 
only  were  they  incompatible  with  the  gods  themselves,  but  as 
this  characteristic  of  theirs  was  to  a  high  degree  contagious, 
nothing  which  had  been  in  close  contact  with  them  could  ap- 
proach sacred  things  either,  without  a  preliminary  purifica- 
tion. Now  when  this  idea  is  once  firmly  established  we  have 
the  foundation  of  all  asceticism :  the  sole  end  and  aim  of  the 
ascetic  is  to  keep  himself  as  free  as  possible  from  all  these 
pollutions,  and  to  be  constantly  purifying  himself  from  those 
which  he  has  incurred  in  spite  of  all  his  precautions.  To 
this  end,  he  removes  himself  as  far  as  possible  from  the 
sources  of  pollution,  he  "flees  the  world,"  and  gives  himself 
over  to  prayers,  fasts,  vigils  and  other  purificatory  exercises, 
in  order  that  he  may  remain  pure,  and  approach  as  nearly  as 
possible  to  the  divine.  But  this  definition  would  tend  to 
make  all  men  ascetics;  the  injunctions  which  we  have  been 
observing  were  applicable  to  all  alike:  if  their  mere  ob- 
servance makes  men  ascetics,  the  whole  population  of  ancient 
Greece  would  consequently  have  been  such.  'Now  as  will  be 
seen  in  the  course  of  this  study,  there  actually  is  a  certain 

75  C.  I.  A.  IV,  p.  203,  1.  81 :   Els  rds  iepte  oldm  rais  kpei'ms 
fflFoucart,  pp.  214f. 


26 

asceticism  immanent  in  the  whole  religious  life,  but  it  would 
undeniably  be  an  abuse  of  language  to  carry  the  point  to  this 
extreme.  The  practical  distinction  is  this :  all  men  are  pol- 
luted from  time  to  time  and  must  be  purified — all  men  sin 
and  must  do  penance,  to  put  it  in  Christian  terms — but  the 
great  majority  are  not  especially  scrupulous  about  the  matter, 
and  if  the  great  stains  are  washed  away,  and  a  fair  average 
of  purity  is  maintained,  they  are  content  to  let  it  go  at  that ; 
but  some  persons  are  more  careful,  and  are  not  content  with 
this  average  purity;  they  want  to  raise  themselves  to  a  still 
higher  degree  of  purity,  and  therefore  submit  themselves 
to  all  sorts  of  extraordinary  penances  and  abstinences; 
these  are  the  veritable  ascetics.  We  have  found  examples 
of  these,  too,  and  we  have  observed  some  primitive  cults  in 
which  it  was  required  that  there  be  certain  persons  who  main- 
tained a  state  of  purity  above  that  of  ordinary  people.  We 
are  justified  in  saying,  therefore,  that  these  persons  were 
ascetics. 

In  the  first  place  were  the  priests,  for  whom  there  were 
extraordinary  regulations  in  regard  to  purity,  and  especially 
in  regard  to  chastity :  we  might  say  that  the  priests  who  lived 
up  to  these  regulations  were  ascetics,  for  by  acts  of  renuncia- 
tion and  abnegation,  they  sought  to  attain  a  purity  higher 
than  that  with  which  the  ordinary  person  was  content.  The 
Eleusinian  mysteries,  too,  tended  in  this  direction,  for  not 
everybody  was  initiated ;  those  who  were  did  it  because  they 
wished  to  be  unusually  pure,  and  because  special  rewards,  in 
the  form  of  immortality,  were  promised  to  those  who  attained 
to  this  degree  of  purity;  we  have  also  seen  the  ascetic  ele- 
ments in  the  rites  conferring  this  purity.  Finally  there  can 
be  no  doubt  of  the  genuinely  ascetic  nature  of  the  restrictions 
placed  upon  the  Eleusinian  priesthood,  and  particularly  upon 
the  priestesses  known  as  the  lepeicu  Travayeis  :  here  we  have 
the  essential  features  of  a  veritable  monastic  life. 

Other  cases  of  early  Greek  asceticism  are  sometimes  men- 


27 

tioned.  Thus  Herodotus  and  Pindar  mention  a  certain 
Abaris,  a  Hyperborean,  who  is  said  to  have  gone  all  around 
the  world  on  an  arrow,  fasting;77  later  writers  associate  him 
with  Pythagoras/8  so  there  may  have  been  other  ascetic 
features  to  this  performance;  his  fasting  may  have  helped 
give  him  the  supernatural  power  required  for  such  a  feat. 
Another  celebrated  ascetic  of  early  times  was  Epimenides, 
who  purified  Athens  in  the  latter  part  of  the  seventh  cen- 
tury;79 his  fasts  and  his  general  ascetic  form  of  life  are  told 
by  Diogenes  Laertius  and  others.80  But  none  of  these  men 
added  anything  new:  they  are  merely  further  examples  of 
what  we  have  already  seen,  and  only  serve  to  make  more 
certain  our  contention  that  ascetic  tendencies  existed  in 
Greece  from  the  very  earliest  times. 

As  to  the  origin  of  these  ascetic  tendencies  we  can  say 
almost  nothing.  In  his  recent  work  on  the  mysteries  of 
Eleusis,  Foucart  has  argued  that  the  rites  were  introduced 
into  Greece  from  Egypt.81  One  of  his  proofs  of  this  is  their 
asceticism,  which  he  compares  with  that  of  the  devotees  of 
Isis  and  Osiris;  he  even  claims  that  fasting  was  a  rite  un- 
known to  other  early  cults  in  Greece  (he  includes  the  Thes- 
mophoria  with  the  Eleusinian  rites,  as  being  in  honor  of 
Demeter).82  So  it  may  be  that  this  cult,  with  its  fasts  and 
its  asceticism,  was  introduced  from  Egypt;  but  in  any  case, 
the  introduction  took  place  very  early  (at  least  fifteen  hun- 

77  Herod,  iv  36 ;  Find,  f rg.  270.     Cf .  Plato,  Charm.  158b,  where  he  is 
mentioned  as  a  wonder-working  physician.     Eeferences  in  later  litera- 
ture are  numerous. 

78  Jamb,  de  Vit.  Pythag.  xix  §  91. 

7»  Or  perhaps  the  end  of  the  sixth;  cf.  Pauly-Wisowa,  s.v. 

so  Diels,  Frag,  der  VorsoJcrater,  II,  pt.  i,  pp.  489ff.;  esp.  490,  11.  16ff., 
492,  25ff.,  493,  4ff.;  Bohde,  Psyche,  II  96ff.;  W.  Capelle,  Altgriechische 
AsJcese,  in  Neue  Jahrbticher  fur  das  Tdassische  Altertum,  25  (1910), 
p.  683. 

si  Foucart,  Pt.  I;  cf.  Harrison,  pp.  120ff.j  this  was  the  belief  of  the 
ancients  themselves,  Herod,  ii  171. 

sz  Foucart,  pp.  62ff. 


28 

dred  years  before  Christ  according  to  Foucart),  so  we  may 
say  that  it  was  a  part  of  the  religion  of  Greece  at  the  earliest 
period  with  which  we  are  acquainted.  It,  and  the  other 
forms  of  asceticism  which  we  have  signalized,  were  a  part 
of  the  Greek  religion  from  the  very  start. 

But  really  there  is  no  occasion  to  point  out  a  specific  origin 
for  all  these  forms  of  asceticism,  since  they  all  are  to  be  found 
in  practically  every  known  religion.  Wachter  and  Fehrle 
give  numerous  citations  from  secondary  works  establishing 
parallel  rites  and  beliefs  in  other  religions.  The  asceticism 
which  we  have  been  describing  shows  remarkable  similarities 
with  that  found  in  the  most  primitive  peoples  of  whom  we 
have  any  knowledge.83 

Nor  does  it  make  the  slightest  difference  to  the  present 
study  what  their  origin  was.  As  has  already  been  clearly 
stated,  this  chapter  is  merely  introductory;  it  is  intended  to 
summarize  the  work  of  previous  scholars  who  have  made 
special  studies  of  early  Greek  religion.  Their  conclusions  in 
regard  to  the  origin  and  interpretation  of  these  rites  have 
been  mentioned  in  passing,  but  it  cannot  be  emphasized  too 
strongly  that  the  remainder  of  our  study  does  not  depend  in 
any  way  upon  the  truth  or  falsity  of  these -conclusions.  All 
that  this  chapter  has  sought  to  establish  is  that  at  an  early 
period,  the  Greeks  had  very  decided  notions  of  purity  and 
pollution,  and  that  from  these,  they  deduced  a  theology  which 
at  times  demanded  genuinely  ascetic  acts.  If  this  has  been 
established,  as  we  believe  that  it  has,  the  foundation  is  laid 
for  the  higher  developments  of  ascetic  thought  among  the 
Greeks,  which  is  the  subject  of  the  present  study. 

sa  Cf.  Durkheim,  The  Elementary  Forms  of  ihe  Religious  Life,  Bk. 
Ill,  ch.  1,  pp.  299ff.  (Eng.  tr.). 


CHAPTER  II 

ASCETICISM  IN  THE  ORPHIC  MOVEMENT 

The  facts  which  we  have  been  discussing  so  far  all  originate 
in  the  most  primitive  and  ancient  form  of  the  Greek  religion, 
which  we  can  know.  But  though  primitive,  they  did  not 
pass  away  with  primitive  Greece;  on  the  contrary,  they  re- 
mained as  a  substratum  of  the  Greek  religion  throughout  the 
course  of  its  history.  As  Greek  society  advanced,  however, 
the  religion  naturally  developed  also.  And  about  the  eighth 
century,  such  an  advance  did  begin  to  be  noticeable.  At  this 
time  began  the  period  of  commercial  expansion  and  coloniza- 
tion. The  Ionian  cities  and  particularly  Miletus  took  the 
lead,  but  others  in  Greece  proper  came  close  behind.  Thus, 
the  relative  isolation  of  former  times  was  broken  down  to  a 
certain  extent,  and  the  intelligence  of  ordinary  men  was 
raised;  an  extensive  reorganization  of  society  then  became 
necessary,  above  all  in  the  intellectual  world.1  This  social 
movement  also  had  its  effects  upon  the  Greek  religion.  Ac- 
cording to  Gruppe,  an  oriental  mysticism  entered  Greece  at 
this  time.2  New  cults  arose,  and  old  ones  were  transformed. 
At  this  time,  too,  the  religion  became  more  diversified ;  with 
the  larger  number  of  cults,  different  sorts  were  offered,  and  a 
person  could  choose,  to  a  certain  extent  at  least,  the  one  to 
which  he  would  give  his  closest  allegiance.  Thus,  some  peo- 
ple developed  the  religion  of  the  Olympian  gods,  but  there 
were  others  who  were  not  satisfied  with  this.  The  old  long- 
ing for  purity  remained  in  their  hearts,  but  their  old  rites 

1  For  this  general  movement  and  its   repercussions  upon  philosophy 
and  religion,  see  Eduard  Meyer,  Gesch.  des  Altertums,  II,  Bk.  3,  pp. 
533-762;  Busolt,  Griechische  GeschicMe,  I,  ch.  2,  pp.  127-509. 

2  Gruppe,  Gesch.  der  griech.  Mythologie,  I  §  72. 

29 


30 

could  no  longer  satisfy  it — nor  could  Olympus,  in  spite  of  its 
glorious  splendors.  So  a  new  religious  movement  came  over 
Greece  in  the  seventh  and  sixth  centuries  B.C.,  which  was  a 
continuation  and  revival  of  the  old  native  religion,  and  also 
a  development  upon  it.  "  The  essence  of  the  new  religion 
was  the  belief  that  man  could  become  god:  the  new  ritual 
feature  it  introduced,  a  feature  wholly  lacking  in  the  old 
uneaten  '  sacrifice,7  was  mystical  communion  by  eating  the 
body  of  the  god.  But  as  man  was  mortal,  there  was  mor- 
tality to  be  purged  away;  and  hence,  although  with  a  new 
faith  and  a  new  hope,  men  reverted  to  the  old  ritual  of  puri- 
fication."3 

The  first  representative  of  this  new  religious  movement  to 
appear  in  Greece  was  the  religion  of  Dionysos.  Though  there 
may  have  been  an  old  Greek  god  of  somewhat  the  same  nature, 
the  real  Dionysos  cult  seems  to  have  been  introduced  into 
Greece  from  Thrace,  between  the  ninth  and  sixth  centuries. 
In  Thrace,  the  cult  was  adapted  to  the  wild  and  savage  nature 
of  the  country  and  its  people,  and  had  a  highly  orgiastic  char- 
acter. It  was  celebrated  upon  the  mountains  at  night,  in 
the  midst  of  burning  torches,  tumultuous  music  and  loud 
cries ;  the  rites  were  performed  mostly  by  women,  who  danced 
and  revelled  thus  until  they,  like  the  Mainads  whom  they 
impersonated,  became  quite  beside  themselves.  Being  wholly 
unable  to  account  for  this  extraordinary  madness  which  thus 
seized  them,  they  attributed  it  to  the  god;  he  was  thought 
of  as  "  insane."4 

When  the  cult  was  introduced  into  Greece,  it  was  long  a 
scandal ;  the  more  sober  Greeks  did  not  at  all  approve  of  their 
women  carrying  on  in  such  a  way  on  the  mountains  at  night. 

s  Harrison,  Prolegomena,  p.  162,  cf .  p.  478. 

*For  the  Thracian  rites  of  Dionysos,  see  Bohde,  Psyche,  II,  ch.  i-ii. 
Foueart,  Le  Culte  de  Dionysos  en  Attique,  in  Memoir es  de  I' Academic 
des  Inscriptions  et  Belles  Lettres  (1904),  ch.  2;  and  the  articles  on 
"Dionysos"  in  Pauly-Wissowa,  Eoscher  and  the  Dictionnaire  des  An~ 
tiquites.  The  references  to  Dionysos  in  classic  writers  are  collected  in 
Farnell,  Cults  of  the  Greek  States,  V,  pp.  280-334. 


31 

But  gradually  the  rites  became  softened  and  toned  down; 
Dionysos  became  civilized.  He  became  associated  with  wine 
(undoubtedly  because  of  the  similar  effects  of  these  two  forms 
of  inspiration)  and  presently  found  himself  one  of  the  most 
popular  gods  of  Greece.  The  details  of  his  cult  do  not  inter- 
est the  present  study,  for  it  hardly  seems  probable  that  this 
ecstatic  religion  of  a  wine  god  should  be  of  importance  for 
the  development  of  ascetic  ideals.  This  was  not  entirely  the 
case,  however.  For  its  rites  led  its  worshippers  to  believe  in 
an  external  god,  with  whom  it  was  possible  for  an  individual 
to  unite  himself:  the  Bacchantes  felt  the  god  within  them, 
they  believed  themselves  inspired.  This  led  to  the  develop- 
ment of  several  beliefs  in  regard  to  the  possibility  of  union 
with  god,  sacraments,  and  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  all  of 
which  were  put  to  use  by  later  ascetical  theologians.5  But 
the  chief  importance  of  the  Dionysos  cult  for  the  present 
study  lies  in  its  later  developments,  particularly  Orphism. 
Here  there  was  real  asceticism. 

The  origins  of  Orphism  are  by  no  means  clear,  but  one 
thing  at  least  seems  certain,  namely,  that  it  was  born  of  the 
religion  of  Dionysos,  and  in  fact,  was  a  higher  spiritual  devel- 
opment of  it.  Legend  had  it  that,  like  the  religion  of  Diony- 
sos, Orphism  originated  in  Thrace.  Ancient  and  modern 
writers,  however,  have  suggested  various  other  sources :  some 
have  noticed  resemblances  with  Egyptian  practices;  others 
with  the  mysteries  of  Samothrace ;  some  have  claimed  Phryg- 
ian or  Cretan  origins ;  a  connection  with  Pythagoras  has  been 
claimed  by  others;  while  if  we  are  to  take  the  word  of  the 
early  Christians  for  it,  Orpheus  derived  practically  all  his 
doctrine  from  the  books  of  Moses.6  There  is  probably  a  cer- 
tain element  of  truth  in  all  of  these  conjectures  except  the 

8  For  the  influence  of  Dionysos,  see  also  Capelle,  in  Neue  Jahr'b'b.  f.  Td. 
Altertum,  25  (1910),  pp.  684ft5. 

«  References  to  authors  who  have  supported  these  views  will  be  found 
in  Monceaux,  in  Diet,  des  Antiq.,  art.  ' '  Orphici. ' ' 


32 

last;  in  the  course  of  their  evolution,  the  Orphics  probably 
did  adopt  elements  from  all  of  these  various  sources.  But 
during  the  early  stages  of  the  history  of  the  sect,  these  were 
all  so  well  assimilated  and  adapted  to  the  needs  and  desires 
of  the  Greek  people  that  the  religion  was  in  no  way  a  foreign 
one,  but  was  so  thoroughly  Hellenic  in  its  nature  that  some 
have  been  led  to  deny  a  foreign  origin  at  all.  This  is,  how- 
ever, an  untenable  position ;  modern  scholars  are  pretty  gen- 
erally agreed  upon  the  Thracian  origin  of  Orphism.7 

Tradition  had  it,  too,  that  the  religion  was  founded  by 
Orpheus.  The  legends  concerning  this  singer  were  numerous 
and  varied,  but  they  do  not  concern  us  here,  any  more  than 
the  much-disputed  question  of  the  historical  existence  of 
Orpheus  does:  it  makes  little  difference  to  us  whether  he 
really  existed,  as  Miss  Harrison  has  recently  maintained,  or 
whether  he  did  not,  as  others,  since  the  days  of  Aristotle,  have 
held.8  The  first  literary  references  to  Orphism  are  in  Iby- 
cos  (c.  560)  and  Pindar  (c.  490)  ;9  during  the  latter  half  of 
the  sixth  century  the  earliest  Orphic  books  known  were 
composed  or  collected.10  So  we  can  state  that  during 
the  sixth  and  following  centuries  the  Orphic  cult  spread 
throughout  Greece,  and  then  proceed  to  what  is  the  important 
thing  for  us,  namely,  that  Orphism  was  a  religion  seeking 
consecration  or  the  attainment  of  divine  life,  that  it  laid  the 

7  Ancient  authors  who  held  this  opinion  include,  Strabo,  p.  330 ; 
Herod,  ii  81;  Eur.  Hippol.  953;  Apollod.  I  3,  2;  Diod.  Ill  65;  Plut. 
Alex.  2;  Procl.  In  Plat.  Eemp.  p.  398;  Macrob.  Sat.  I  18,  17;  In  Somn. 
Scip.  I  12,  12. 

»Cic.  De  nat.  deor.  I  38,  107:  Orpheum  poetam  docet  Aristoteles 
numquam  fuisse,  et  hoc  orphicum  carmen  Pythagorei  ferunt  cuiusdam 
fuisse  Ceropis. — This  text  may  signify  that  Orpheus  never  existed  or 
merely  that  he  was  not  a  poet;  the  former  is  the  interpretation  gen- 
erally accepted.  See  also  Gruppe,  in  Lex.  d.  griech.  u.  ro'm.  Mythologie, 
art.  "Orpheus"  and  Monceaux,  in  Diet,  des  Antiq.,  art.  "Orpheus"  and 
"Orphici";  Harrison,  pp.  470ff. 

»Ibyc.  fr.  9  Bergk;  Pind.  Pyth.  IV  716  (315). 

id.  s.v.  'Op<pe6s;Clem.  Al.  Strom.  I  21;  Paus.  I  22,  7;  etc. 


33 

greatest  emphasis  upon  purity  and  purification  and  upon  the 
blessed  immortality  to  which  they  led,  and  that  to  this  end 
a  mode  of  life  which  was,  theoretically  at  least,  far  more 
ascetic  than  anything  which  had  yet  appeared  in  Greece  was 
taught. 

It  is  in  these  doctrines  that  we  are  able  to  see  the  connec- 
tion and  also  the  profound  differences  between  this  religion 
and  that  of  Dionysos.  Both  worshipped  the  same  deity ;  both 
shared  in  beliefs  which  were  not  universally  held  by  the 
Greeks ;  Orpheus  passed  as  a  reformer  of  the  Dionysiac  reli- 
gion.11 But  "in  the  whole  Church  of  Dionysos-Bacchos, 
the  Orphics  formed  a  mystic  Church,  an  elite  of  the  devout, 
for  whom  the  essential  thing  was  doctrine,  purity  of  life,  and 
preparation  for  death  and  future  existences."12  Therefore, 
though  Orphism  was  born  of  the  religion  of  Dionysos,  the 
two  were  also  very  different.  Nothing  shows  this  better  than 
the  nature  of  the  cult.  While  the  worship  of  Dionysos  en- 
couraged tumultuous  and  ecstatic  manifestations,  the  Orphics 
adopted  the  contrary  attitude.  In  an  inscription  discovered 
on  the  Acropolis  are  preserved  the  rules  of  an  Orphic  sect; 
among  the  rules  we  read  that  "within  the  place  of  sacrifice 
no  one  is  to  make  a  noise  .  .  .  but  each  is  to  say  his  part 
in  all  quietness  and  order,'7  and,  moreover,  if  anyone  does 
make  a  disturbance,  he  is  to  be  taken  out.13  The  Orphic  cult 
was  "a  worship  fair  and  orderly."14  With  the  Orphics,  the 
things  of  highest  importance  were  doctrine  and  the  observance 
of  an  ascetic  life;  as  we  shall  see,  their  doctrine  was  a  real 
contribution  to  the  history  of  Greek  thought,  having  had  an 
enormous  influence  upon  no  less  a  thinker  than  Plato,  and 
the  mode  of  life  which  followed  as  a  result  of  this  doctrine 
was  destined  to  no  less  important  a  role  in  subsequent  his- 

11  Diod.  Ill  65. 

12  Monceaux,  loc.  cit.,  p.  248. 

is  The  inscription  was  published  in  Ath.  Mit.  xix  (1894),  p.  248. 
i*Cf.  Harrison,  p.  476. 

4 


34 

tory.  As  the  whole  formed  a  unified  system,  we  must  begin 
by  a  brief  examination  of  the  general  theology  of  the  Orphics. 
The  sources  of  our  knowledge  of  Orphic  doctrine  are  vari- 
ous, and  of  varying  value.  The  best  source  is  the  literature 
which  was  produced  by  the  sect;  large  numbers  of  poems, 
either  cosmological,  theological,  mythological  or  liturgical, 
were  written  during  the  one  thousand  years  which  separated 
the  fourth  century  A.D.  from  the  sixth  B.C.,  of  which  three 
complete  works  and  numerous  fragments  still  remain.15 
During  the  course  of  its  history,  Orphism  was  greatly  influ- 
enced by  various  contemporary  movements  of  thought,  and 
unfortunately  most  of  the  literature  which  we  now  possess 
comes  from  the  very  end  of  the  whole  development.  But  on 
the  other  hand,  the  value  of  these  late  poems  as  illustrative 
of  earlier  thought  has  frequently  been  too  greatly  depreciated : 
several  years  ago  a  number  of  tablets  of  very  thin  gold  were 
discovered  in  tombs  in  southern  Italy,  dating  from  the  fourth 
or  third  century  before  our  era,  and  inscribed  with  Orphic 
teachings;16  previously  these  doctrines  had  been  known  only 
from  writings  coming  from  the  fourth  century  A.D.,  so  at 
a  stroke  their  antiquity  was  augmented  by  700  years.  These 
tablets  are  our  most  important  source  for  the  earlier  Orphism : 
as  they  were  buried  with  the  dead,  the  information  they  im- 
part is  chiefly  eschatological,  but  there  is  much  that  is  litur- 
gical, and  in  either  case,  they  well  illustrate  Orphic  thought. 
In  addition  to  these  and  the  earlier  portions  of  the  Orphic 
poems,  we  have  several  passages,  either  expressly  or  obviously 
referring  to  Orphic  beliefs  and  practices,  in  contemporary 
Greek  literature.  So  taking  what  sources  we  have,  let  us 
attempt  a  brief  sketch  of  Orphic  theology.  - 

is  The  three  works  are  the  Argonautica,  Lithica  and  the  Orphic 
Hymns;  the  fragments  have  been  collected  by  Abel,  Orphica  (Leipzig, 
1885)  and  Vari,  Nova  Fragmenta  Orphica  (Wien.  Stud.  XII,  p.  222). 

is  See  the  textual  discussion  of  these  tablets  by  Gilbert  Murray,  in 
Harrison,  Prolegomena,  appendix,  pp.  660-674. 


35 

To  begin  with,  we  must  say  that  "  the  Orphic  philosophy 
undertook  to  give  an  answer  to  the  two  great  questions  which 
tormented  the  Greek  mind  after  the  sixth  century :  an  explana- 
tion of  the  world,  and  the  destiny  of  man.  On  the  one  hand, 
the  Orphics  gave  a  cosmological  and  theological  system,  and 
on  the  other  a  metaphysical  doctrine  of  the  soul.7'17  Into  the 
details  of  their  theogony  and  cosmogony  it  is  not  necessary 
for  us  to  enter;  it  is  sufficient  to  say  that  the  earliest  forms 
of  these  doctrines  did  not  differ  markedly  from  those  of 
Hesiod  on  the  same  subject.  In  general,  the  whole  thing, 
both  theogony  and  cosmogony,  is  very  confused,  and  it  is 
hardly  worth  our  while  to  attempt  to  unravel  it. 

Their  anthropogony,  however,  is  more  important,  for  in 
this  a  belief  fundamental  to  later  asceticism,  the  dual  nature 
of  man,  is  very  clearly  stated.  According  to  the  myth, 
Dionysos  was  a  favorite  son  of  Zeus,  but  one  day  when  he 
happened  to  be  in  the  form  of  a  bull,  he  was  caught  and  torn 
to  pieces  by  the  wild  Titans,  themselves  of  divine  ancestry, 
who  thought  to  gain  dominion  over  the  world  thus;18  his 
heart  alone  was  saved,  which  Zeus  ate  and  presently  brought 
forth  a  new  Dionysos.  But  the  Titans  had  to  be  punished, 
so  Zeus  destroyed  them  with  his  thunderbolt.  From  their 
ashes  men  were  made.  So  to  this  day  men  are  of  a  double 
nature:  on  the  one  hand  they,  like  their  ancestors,  are  of 
divine  origin,  but  on  the  other  hand,  they  are  descended  from 
the  wicked  Titans,  and  their  forbears'  sin  is  upon  them. 
Like  the  Christians  centuries  later  the  Orphics  believed,  there- 
fore, in  the  original  divinity  of  man  and  in  his  fall,  and  in 
the  doctrine  of  original  sin.  Pindar  speaks  of  this  fault  as 

IT  Monceaux,  loc.  cit.,  p.  249. 

18  The  part  which  the  old  Dionysiac  rite  of  tearing  a  bull  asunder  and 
eating  its  raw  flesh,  the  Omophagia,  had  in  the  development  of  this 
myth  has  been  shown  by  Miss  Harrison  (p.  495).  The  Orphic  could 
not  bring  himself  to  give  up  the  old  savage  rite  of  daubing  himself 
with  white  clay  and  eating  raw  bulls,  but  he  did  invent  a  new  myth  to 
explain  it  and  give  it  a  high  spiritual  significance. 


36 


the  7ra\(uov  TreVtfo?  ;19  Jamblichus  refers  to  it  as  the 
dfjuapTrj/JLara.20  Before  their  fall  the  Titans  had  lived  with 
the  gods,  but  as  a  result  of  their  sin,  their  descendants  were 
exiled  from  this  blissful  abode,  and  condemned  to  terrestrial 
life.  Though  they  retained  their  souls,  the  symbol  of  their 
divinity,  a  body  was  forced  upon  them,  too,  which  is  the  sign 
of  their  fallen  nature,  and,  as  it  were,  the  prison  of  the  soul 
(body  =  <r£>  pa  ;  prison  =  o-fjfjia  )  ,21 

The  soul,  thanks  to  its  divine  nature,  is  immortal,  and  the 
hope  is  held  out  to  it  that  it  may  at  length  regain  its  original 
state.  The  Orphic  eschatology  shows  this  very  clearly.  In 
the  Orphic  tablets  and  the  "  Nekyia  "  in  the  eleventh  book  of 
the  Odyssey  (which  was  clearly  of  Orphic  origin22),  we  have 
descriptions  of  the  other  world  as  they  imagined  it.  In  the 
latter,  we  read  of  the  punishments  of  notorious  sinners,  such 
as  Tantalus  and  Sisyphus;  in  the  former  we  find  directions 
for  the  pure  as  to  how  they  are  to  proceed.  Both  from  the 
tablets  and  other  early  Orphic  literature  it  is  evident  that 
the  two  main  features  of  their  eschatology  were  the  ideas  of 
future  rewards  and  punishments  for  acts  committed  in  this 
life,  and  that  of  the  transmigration  of  souls.  If  one  strives 
earnestly  to  regain  the  primitive  purity,  he  will  succeed  at 
last,  and  will  then  dwell  forever  in  some  Happy  Isles,  or 
perhaps  in  heaven  itself;  but  until  that  time,  he  is  doomed 
to  pass  from  body  to  body,  even  entering  animals.  If  his 
deeds  during  life  are  good,  he  will  have  a  better  host  next 
time,  but  if  they  are  bad,  his  next  abode  will  be  much  worse. 

i»  Fr.  110  Bergk. 

20  Pro*.  VIII  134. 

21  This  idea  is  referred  to  the  Orphics  in  Plato,  Cratyl.  400c;    cf. 
Phaedr.  62b;  Procl.  In  Plat.  Eemp.  372;  Jambl.  Prot.  VIII  134.     The 
dual  nature  of  man  is  illustrated  by  the  Orphic  tablet  which  makes  the 
soul  say,  upon  arriving  in  Hades  (tr.  Gilbert  Murray,  in  Harrison,  op. 
cit.,  p.  661)  : 

"I  am  a  child  of  Earth  and  Starry  Heaven; 
But  my  race  is  of  Heaven  alone." 
22Dieterich,  NeTcyia,  pp.  75ff. 


37 

This  made  up  what  they  called  the  "  circle  of  generation " ; 
everyone  should  try  to  escape  it  and  enter  the  Happy  Isles, 
and  the  way  to  do  so  is  to  follow  Orphic  teaching.23  Those 
who  have  read  the  early  church  Fathers  will  see  that  Origen, 
in  his  great  work,  de  Principiis,  did  little  more  than  copy 
this;  nor  was  the  influence  of  Orphic  theology  upon  early 
Christians  confined  to  Origen  alone ;  its  influence,  direct  and 
indirect,  upon  the  development  of  Christian  theology,  was 
immense.24 

These  two  ideas  were  fundamental  to  Orphic  theology :  the 
primitive  purity  and  subsequent  fall  of  man,  and  the  possi- 
bility and  desirability  of  regaining  this  purity;  these  were 
the  ideas  which  were  at  the  basis  of  their  entire  rule  of  life, 
and  we  shall  see  that  this  rule  was  a  genuinely  ascetic  one. 
So  purity  was  their  goal,  but  how  did  they  seek  to  attain  it  ? 

In  the  first  place,  all  who  wished  to  be  pure  had  to  have 
themselves  initiated.  Those  who  had  been  initiated  called 
themselves  the  "  Holy  Ones  "  or  the  "  Pure  Ones  "  :  initiation 
by  itself  gave  purification.  After  death  those  who  had  been 

23  These  beliefs  are  well  summed  up  in  three  of  the  Orphic  tablets 
found  at  Compagno,  which  give  the  formula  to  be  spoken  by  a  "pure 
one"  upon  reaching  Hades.  Murray  reconstructs  the  formula  as  fol- 
lows (L  c.,  p.  670) : 

"Out  of  the  Pure  I  come,  Pure  Queen  of  Them  Below, 

And  Eukles  and  Euboleus,  and  other  Gods  and  Demons: 

For  I  avow  me  that  I  am  of  your  blessed  race. 

And  I  have  paid  the  penalty  for  deeds  unrighteous, 

Whether  it  be  that  Fate  laid  me  low  or  the  Gods  Immortal 

Or  ...  with  star-flung  thunderbolt. 

I  have  flown  out  of  the  sorrowful  weary  Wheel; 

I  have  passed  with  eager  feet  to  the  Circle  desired; 

I  have  sunk  beneath  the  bosom  of  Despoina,  Queen  of  the  Under- 
world ; 

I  have  passed  with  eager  feet  to  (or  from)  the  Circle  desired; 

And  now  I  come  a  suppliant  to  Holy  Phersephoneia 

That  of  her  grace  she  may  receive  me  to  the  seats  of  the  Hallowed. — 

Happy  and  Blessed  One,  thou  shalt  be  God  instead  of  Mortal. ' ' 
2*  See  Dieterich,  Nelcyia,  Beitrage  zur  Erlcldrung  der  neuentdeckten 
Petrusapofcalypse  (1893,  2  ed.,  1913). 


38 

initiated  would  receive  a  fairer  fate  than  others,  even  in  case 
they  did  not  succeed  in  attaining  heaven;  while  awaiting  a 
new  incarnation,  they  would  enjoy  a  privileged  lot  in  Hades. 
However,  initiation  by  itself  was  not  enough;  it  was  also 
necessary  to  perform  other  purifications  and  fasts,  to  fulfil 
certain  rites  and  follow  a  special  regimen,  and  more  than  that, 
personal  piety  was  also  essential. 

In  describing  the  efforts  of  the  Orphics  to  attain  purity,  we 
may  begin  by  quoting  two  very  important  passages  from  Eurip- 
ides. The  first  is  a  fragment  of  his  lost  Cretans,  preserved 
by  Porphyry ;  some  one  says : 

"  Kobed  in  pure  white,  I  have  borne  me  clean 
From  man's  vile  birth  and  coffined  clay, 
And  exiled  from  my  lips  alway 
Touch  of  all  meat  where  Life  hath  been."25 

The  second  is  less  sympathetic ;  Theseus  denounces  the  Orphic 
Hippolytos  for  his  self -righteousness,  crying : 

"  Now  is  the  day !     Now  vaunt  thee,  thou  so  pure 
No  flesh  of  life  may  pass  thy  lips !     Now  lure 
Fools  after  thee ;  call  Orpheus  King  and  Lord, 
Make  ecstacies  and  wonders  !     Thumb  thine  hoard 
Of  ancient  rolls  and  ghostly  mysteries."26 

Another  illuminating  passage  is  found  in  Aristophanes's 
Clouds,  in  which  the  comedian  deliberately  parodies  the 
Orphic  mysteries.  Old  Strepsiades  seeks  Socrates,  and  finds 
him  suspended  in  a  basket — that  he  may  be  free  of  earthly 
things  and  give  himself  over  entirely  to  heavenly  ones  !27 

In  these  three  passages  the  essentials  of  Orphic  asceticism  are 
observable :  on  the  one  hand,  purity  is  sought  by  pure  clothes, 
by  keeping  away  from  contaminating  things  and  by  eating  cer- 

25  Tr.  Miss  Harrison. 

26  Eur.  Hipp.  952ff.  tr.  Harrison. 

27  Ar.  Nub.  223ff.     That  this  scene  parodies  Orphic  ritual  is  shown 
by  Dieterieh,  Eh.  Mus.  1893,  pp.  275ff.;  Harrison,  pp.  512ff. 


39 

tain  foods  only ;  on  the  other  is  the  more  far-reaching  proposi- 
tion that  all  matter,  and  all  material  and  worldly  things  are 
impure  and  consequently  to  be  avoided.  In  the  first  place  are 
the  same  old  taboos  which  we  have  already  found  in  primitive 
Greece :  Herodotus  tells  us  that  the  Orphics  could  not  wear, 
or  at  least  could  not  be  buried  in  woollen  clothes;28  we  read 
that  eggs  were  forbidden  them ;  like  many  other  persons,  they 
were  careful  not  to  pollute  themselves  by  eating  beans.29  But 
even  more  important  was  their  aversion  to  all  flesh;  this  is 
explained  by  their  belief  in  the  transmigration  of  souls,  which 
led  one  to  believe  that  he  might  be  eating  a  departed  friend 
if  he  tasted  meat.  In  all  of  these  things,  however,  they  dif- 
fered from  the  other  Greeks  only  in  degree;  the  great  con- 
tribution of  the  Orphics  was  their  doctrine  by  which  they 
rationalized  these  performances.  By  their  depreciation  of 
the  body  and  of  all  matter  generally,  and  by  their  emphasis 
upon  spirit  and  mind  and  their  divine  nature,30  they  drew  a 
sharp  distinction  between  the  real  world  and  a  spiritual  world 
which  they  imagined ;  by  their  teaching  of  the  infinite  supe- 
riority of  the  latter — in  fact,  that  the  former  had  been  created 
merely  as  a  punishment  for  sin — they  prepared  the  way  for 
that  "  other-worldliness  "  which  occupied  so  great  a  place  in 
the  religion  of  Europe  for  centuries  to  come.  They  clearly 
taught  that  the  world  was  bad,  and  that  if  one  would  seek  true 
and  eternal  felicity,  he  must  forsake  it,  he  must  keep  himself 
as  pure  as  possible  from  this  world  of  death  which  is  a  prison- 
house. 

But  their  practice  was  not  so  rigorous  as  their  teaching. 
They  never  went  to  the  extremes  of  the  Buddhist  and  Chris- 

28  Herod.  II  81. 

29  SetXot,  irav8ei.\a,  Kva^uv  ATTO  xeipas  t\eadai. — This   sentiment   is   attrib- 
uted by  different  authors  to  various  persons,  especially  Pythagoras  and 
Empedocles,  but  by  some  to  Orpheus;  see  Diels,  Frg.  d.  VorsoTc.  I  214, 
no.  141. 

30  Cf.  Proel.  ad  Cratyl.  p.  82:    6  kv  rnj.lv  vovs  ALOVVO-ICXKOS  tanv  Kal  aya\fj.a 

6tfT(t)S  TOV  AlOVLXTOU. 


40 

tian  ascetics,  even  though  they  did  share  their  doctrine;  ab- 
stention from  flesh  food  was  their  most  rigorous  self -mortifi- 
cation. They  fled  the  world  in  theory  alone,  and  were  conse- 
quently called  hypocrites  by  some. 

NOT  was  there,  in  a  strict  sense  of  the  term,  such  a  thing 
as  an  organized  Orphic  sect.  There  was  a  body  of  Orphic 
doctrine,  whose  limits  were  always  vague  and  floating,  and 
there  were,  in  various  parts  of  the  Greek  world,  persons  or 
groups  of  persons  who  accepted  this  doctrine,  making  more  or 
less  of  an  attempt  to  live  according  to  it.  But  organized  sect 
there  was  none:  the  doctrine,  partly  philosophical  and  sci- 
entific, partly  theological  and  ascetical,  the  chief  thing  which 
actually  existed.  So  Orphism  was  never  so  popular  as  the 
religion  of  Dionysos;  according  to  the  testimony  of  Plato, 
there  were  numbers  of  disreputable  parsons  who  attached 
themselves  to  the  movement  and  went  around  selling  "  puri- 
fications "  and  other  quacks  of  one  sort  or  another,  but  in  the 
main  Orphism  appealed  only  to  an  elite. 

Closely  associated  with  Orphism  was  another  movement  of 
a  very  similar  character,  Pythagoreanism.  This  doctrine  was 
founded  by  Pythagoras,  who  lived  in  southern  Italy.  It  is 
said  that  he  had  been  profoundly  interested  by  Orphic 
thought,  and  it  is  certain  that  his  system  of  speculation  does 
present  many  points  in  common  with  Orphism.  Chief  among 
these  are  the  doctrines  of  the  transmigration  of  souls  and 
asceticism,  including  abstinence  from  all  flesh  and  beans. 
But  Orphism  knows  nothing  of  the  mathematics  which  was 
so  important  for  Pythagoras,  and  it  is  doubtful  whether  the 
Orphics  ever  achieved  an  organization  comparable  to  that  of 
the  Pythagoreans. 

In  regard  to  the  doctrines  of  the  early  Pythagoreans,  we 
are  even  worse  off  than  for  those  of  the  Orphics :  practically 
all  we  know  of  them  is  derived  from  writers  who  lived  in  the 
time  of  Christ  or  later  (while  Pythagoras  lived  five  centuries 
before)  and  whose  ideas  were  greatly  influenced  by  the 


41 

Pythagoreans  who  flourished  during  the  first  centuries  before 
and  after  the  Christian  era.  By  this  time,  ascetic  thought 
had  undergone  a  tremendous  development  in  the  Hellenistic 
world ;  also  at  this  same  time  everybody  was  most  anxious  to 
attribute  his  ideas  to  some  very  ancient  person.  Conse- 
quently the  various  lives  of  Pythagoras  merit  little  confidence. 

But  from  the  earliest  sources  still  preserved,  it  is  clear  that 
the  Pythagorean  movement  was  largely  religious.  Its  pur- 
pose seems  to  have  been  to  give  its  members  a  more  adequate 
satisfaction  of  their  religious  desires ;  it  was  for  the  "  culti- 
vation of  holiness."31  Also,  it  appears  that  Pythagoras 
"desired  to  effect,  chiefly  by  the  aid  of  religion,  a  reform 
of  the  moral  life."32  To  this  end,  he  developed  still  further 
the  old  idea  taken  over  by  the  Orphics  from  the  devotees  of 
Dionysos,  and  taught  that  "  men  are  in  the  image  of  God."33 
He  made  a  rule  of  life,34  which  his  followers  should  observe, 
and  which  has  been  summed  up  in  the  frequently  quoted 
words  €TTOV  Oew  ;35  to  follow  God  and  become  like  him  is 
Pythogoras's  highest  ideal.36 

In  this  rule  of  life,  asceticism  played  a  considerable  role. 
Of  course  all  that  the  Neo-Pythagoreans  attributed  to  their 
hero  is  not  to  be  accepted  as  historically  true;  these  reports 
are  frequently  contradictory,  as  when  Diogenes  Laertius  says 
in  one  place  that  he  "  knew  neither  love  nor  drunkenness," 
and  a  few  pages  later  speaks  of  his  wife.37  One  of  our  early 
authorities,  Aristoxenos,  is  even  quoted  as  saying  that  he 
preferred  beans  to  every  other  vegetable;38  but  his  prohibi- 

3i  Burnet,  Early  Greek  Philosophy,  p.  97. 

32Zeller,  Philosophy  of  the  Greeks  to  Socrates,  I  355. 

33  Themist.  Or.  xv  192b :  driva  irpbs  dedv  elvai  d^pwTrovs.  =  Clem.  Al. 
Strom,  v  55. 

s*  Plato  speaks  of  Pythagoras  as  the  originator  of  a656sns/3uw,.Kep.  X 
600b. 

ssplut.  de  And.  I  37;  Clem.  Al.  Sir.  v  390D. 

se  Plut.  de  Supers.  9,  169. 

37  Diog.  L.  viii  19  versus  42.     Cf .  Clem.  Al.  Str.  iii  435c. 

**Apud  Gell.  iv  11,  5. 


42 

tion  of  them  is  so  well  attested  that  this  statement  must  be 
set  aside,  unless,  as  has  been  suggested,  there  was  a  sacra- 
mental meal,  to  which  Aristoxenos  is  confusedly  referring, 
in  which  the  sacred  vegetable  was  solemnly  eaten;  but  there 
is  no  other  evidence  for  such  a  sacrament.  In  general,  the 
things  which  Pythagoras  tabooed  were  things  which  the 
Orphics  had  tabooed  before  him:  in  this  side  of  his  teaching 
he  merely  follows  them,  as  is  implied  by  Herodotus  in  the 
passage  already  quoted.39  But  from  numerous  passages  in 
the  Middle  Comedy,  it  is  evident  that  in  the  fourth  century 
before  Christ,  there  were  plenty  of  people  who  practiced 
asceticism  in  his  name.40 

We  'have  seen  that  the  Orphics  devoted  considerable  atten- 
tion to  speculation  upon  the  world,  and  even  to  developing  a 
philosophical  theology.  The  Pythagoreans  too  devoted  them- 
selves to  such  speculations  from  the  very  first.  It  is  not 
necessary  to  describe  their  elaborate  number-philosophy  here : 
Zeller  has  conclusively  shown  that  the  later  ideas  in  regard 
to  the  One  being  God,  spiritual  and  good,  and  the  Dual  being 
material  and  bad,  do  not  date  from  the  earliest  times.41 
However,  in  the  emphasis  which  they  laid  upon  speculation 
(in  which  they  followed  and  developed  upon  the  Orphics), 
the  early  Pythagoreans  did  contribute  to  the  development 
of  ascetical  thought.  Pythagoras  divided  men  into  three 
classes,  the  ^XoVe/oSefc,  or  lovers  of  gain,  the  0iXo'™/*oi,  or 
lovers  of  honor,  and  the  ^tXoVo^ot,  or  lovers  of  knowledge;42 
of  these,  only  the  last  were  really  lofty  persons.  He  also 
taught  that  scientific,  and  especially  mathematical  study  is 
the  best  purifier  of  the  soul ;  it  is  a  means  of  escape  from  the 
"wheel."  This  idea  runs  through  all  the  rest  of  Greek 
history,  constantly  developing,  until  we  get  to  such  persons 

39  Herod,  ii  81. 

40  These  are  collected  in  Diels,  Frg.  d.  Vorsolc.,  pp.  29 Iff. 

41  Zeller,  Op.  ait.,  p.  397. 
42Diog.  Laer.  viii  6. 


43 

as  Apollonius  of  Tyana,  who  regarded  themselves  as  suc- 
cessors of  Pythagoras,  and  for  whom  the  ideal  wise  man  was 
wholly  detached  from  the  world.  Early  stages  of  this  thought 
are  found  in  Socrates,  Plato  and  even  Aristotle ;  it  was  upon 
this  feature  of  Socrates' s  teaching  that  the  Cynics  fastened, 
and  from  them  came  the  ideal  of  the  Stoic  sage  and  the 
Christian  saint.43  Here  is  the  beginning  of  the  tendency  to 
turn  from  the  things  of  "this  world"  to  "higher"  things, 
which  is  the  essence  of  asceticism. 

There  is  one  other  representative  of  this  general  movement 
who  must  be  mentioned  here,  Empedocles.  He  is  generally 
classed  as  a  philosopher,  but  only  a  slight  acquaintance  with 
his  thought  is  sufficient  to  show  his  close  relations  with  the 
Orphics  and  Pythagoreans.  It  is  said  that  in  his  youth  he 
was  affected  by  Orphism,  and  that  at  a  later  period  he  came 
under  the  influence  of  Pythagoras;  one  of  the  fragments, 
which  refers  to  some  great  man  in  very  glowing  terms,  is 
supposed  to  refer  to  him.44  At  any  rate,  he  wrote  a  long 
poem  with  the  good  Orphic  title  "Purifications,"  several 
fragments  of  which  have  been  preserved.  In  this,  the  doc- 
trines of  the  fall  of  man,  the  body  as  a  punishment,  the  trans- 
migration of  souls,  purification  by  asceticism,  and  the  possi- 
bility of  final  reconciliation  with  God  are  clearly  taught.  In 
the  Introduction  to  his  poem  he  says  that  there  is  a  decree 
of  Necessity  that  whoever  of  the  demons  polluted  his  hands 
with  bloodshed  or  strife  or  perjury  must  leave  the  abode  of 
the  gods  for  three  thousand  seasons,  passing  from  one  form  of 
mortal  to  another;  such  a  one  the  author  himself  claims  to 
be,  an  exile  from  God  and  a  wanderer.45  He  says  else- 

43  Burnet,  Early  Greek  Philosophy,  p.  89f . ;  Greek  Philosophy,  Part  I 
p.  41. 

**Frg.  129  Diels. 

45  Frg.  115:  ?<TTIJ>  'A.vayKi)s  XP^M«  •  •  • 

evrk  TIS  &fJLTr\arji-[](ri  <f>6v(?  <f>i\ia  yvla 
[NeiKet  #']  6s  K(C)  tirlopKov  djuapT^eras 

oiT€  jLiaKpatwi'os  XeXcixacri  /Stow 


44 

where  "  from  what  honor  and  from  what  length  of  bliss  have 
I  come  to  mortals,  falling  to  earth,"46  and  again  "  I  wept 
and  wailed  upon  seeing  this  uninhabitable  land,"47  and  "  we 
have  come  into  a  roofed-over  cave."48  The  body  is  an  un- 
natural garment.49  Men  are  in  a  fallen  state.  Closely  con- 
nected with  this  is  the  doctrine  of  the  transmigration  of  souls. 
"  Already  I  have  been  a  boy  and  a  maiden,  a  bush,  a  bird 
and  a  mute  fish  in  the  sea."50  Men  are  therefore  related  to 
animals,  and  the  eating  of  flesh  is  consequently  forbidden; 
"  will  you  not  stop  this  hateful  slaughter  ?  do  you  not  see  that 
you  are  eating  one  another  in  your  thoughtlessness  ?  "51  In 
one  fragment  he  attributes  his  then  unhappy  state  to  his 
having  eaten  flesh  :  "  alas,  that  ruthless  time  did  not  destroy 
me  before  the  abominable  act  of  taking  meat  across  my 
lips  !  "52  But  improvement  is  possible,  and  is  to  be  accom- 
plished by  following  the  rule  of  life  which  he  sets  forth: 
"  happy  is  he  who  possesses  the  riches  of  divine  wisdom,  but 
he  is  miserable  to  whom  the  doctrine  is  dark."53  If  people 
do  follow  this  way  of  life,  they  shall  at  last  "  appear  among 
mortal  men  as  prophets,  song-writers,  physicians  and  princes  ; 
and  thence  they  rise  up  as  gods  exalted  in  honor,  sharing  the 
hearth  of  the  other  gods  and  the  same  table,  free  from  human 
woes,  safe  from  destiny  and  incapable  of  hurt."54 


rpis  HLV  nvpias  upas  O.TTO  nciKapuv 
4>vofJik.vovs  TravToia  5td  xP^vov  eWe 
apyccXeas  /Sioroto  jueraXXdcrowra  /ceXeu?9ous  .  . 
T&V  Kal  ey<j)  vvv  ei/u,  0iryds  deader  nai  01X17x775, 


46  Frg.  119. 

47  Frg.  H8. 
*s  Frg.  120. 

49  Frg.   126  :    aapK&v  a\\oyv&Ti  TrepioreXXouo-Q; 
50Frg.  117. 
si  Frg.  136. 

52  Frg.  139. 

53  Frg.   132  :    6Xj8tos,  6s  $eiaw  Trpairlbwv  kurriffaTo  TT\OVTOV, 

deiXos  d'  ,  V  ffKOToevcra  de&v  Trepl 
5*Frgg.  146-7. 


45 

In  the  rule  of  life  which  he  laid  down,  ascetic  features  were 
prominent.  Not  only  did  he  forbid  flesh  food,  but  he  also 
placed  a  taboo  upon  beans55  and  laurel.56  In  these  things  he 
is  merely  following  the  model  of  the  old  injunctions  for  purity 
which  dated  from  the  most  primitive  times.  But  he  also 
tended  to  put  a  spiritual  interpretation  upon  some  of  them : 
thus  he  said,  "Fast  from  evil."57  Finally,  he  says  in  one 
of  the  fragments  of  his  other  poem  that  the  four  roots  of  all 
things  are  Zeus,  Hera,  Aidoneus  (i.  e.,  Hades)  and  a  goddess 
named  Nestis,  "  Fasting,"  "  who  moistens  with  tears  the  well- 
spring  of  mortals."58  Diogenes  explains  these  elements  as 
fire,  earth,  air  and  water,59  but  why  Empedocles  raised  an 
otherwise  unknown  goddess  of  this  ascetic  name  to  so  im- 
portant a  place  is  not  clear,  unless  it  be  that  he  wished  to 
emphasize  the  ascetic  exercise  whose  name  she  bore.  It  has 
been  suggested  that  she  was  some  form  of  an  oriental  goddess, 
for  example,  Isis  weeping  for  Osiris,  or  perhaps  that  she  was 
connected  with  the  Adonis  myth.60  In  this  case  we  would 
have  a  Greek  thinker  at  least  giving  recognition  to  a  myth 
which  teaches  one  of  the  most  highly  spiritualized  forms  of 
asceticism:  the  doctrine  of  purification  or  forgiveness  after 
mere  weeping  and  sorrow.  This  interpretation  of  Em- 
pedocles's  remark,  however,  is  only  hypothetical. 

As  we  pointed  out  at  the  opening  of  the  present  section,  the 
people  who  were  interested  in  the  movements  which  we  have 

55Frg.  141. 
56Frg.  140. 

57  Frg.  144:    pTjarevaat  Ka/coTiyros. 

58  Frg.   6.  Ttaaapct  yap  iravrajv  ptfco/zara  Trp&rov  a/cove  ' 

Zeus  &pYn$  HPT;  re  <£epe0-/3ios  776*  'AiScopeus 
NTJOTIS  t?  ,  ?;  SctKpvois  reyyei  KpovvojfjLCt  Pporeiov. 

5»  Diog.  Laer.  viii  76:  Ata  nkv  TO  irvp  \kyuv,  "Hpr^v  8e  rty  yrjv,  'AiSovea  5e 
r6i>  Upa,  NrjaTiv  ST)  rb  vdup.  Burnet,  Early  Greek  Philosophy,  p.  264n. 
argues  that  Diogenes  has  mixed  these,  and  that  Zeus  is  really  the  air 
and  Hades  fire;  this  seems  very  plausible. 

eo  See  Dieterich,  on  Hilgenfeld,  Die  Grdbinschrift  des  Aberkios  er- 
Uart,  in  Berliner  Philologische  Wochenschrift,  1897,  p.  394. 


46 

just  been  describing  were  probably  descended  from  the  old 
population,  and  who  had  been  able  to  raise  their  status  and 
intelligence  somewhat  (but  not  too  much)  thanks  to  the  eco- 
nomic developments  of  the  seventh  and  sixth  centuries; 
their  religion  was  largely  a  continuation  and  a  development 
of  the  primitive  rites  of  purification  which  we  described  in 
the  first  section  of  our  essay.  But  at  the  same  time  there 
were  other  streams  of  thought  in  Greece,  to  the  eminent  repre- 
sentatives of  which  the  title  of  philosopher  is  generally  given. 
We  must  not  assume,  however,  that  there  was  absolutely  no 
interaction  between  the  two  schools:  on  the  contrary  there 
seems  to  have  been  a  good  deal  of  it.  Nevertheless,  it  is 
generally  possible  to  distinguish  them,  because  after  all,  their 
thought  was  quite  different,  and  appealed  to  different  classes 
of  persons.  In  Periclean  times,  the  Orphics  were  not  very 
high-class  persons,  but  the  sophists  were. 

That  this  distinction  was  not  a  hard  and  fast  one,  and  not 
always  even  a  possible  one,  is  shown  in  the  first  place  by  the 
fact  that  the  early  philosophers,  Thales,  Anaximander, 
Heraclitus,  etc.,  were  influenced  to  a  considerable  extent  by 
Orphism,  and  that  it  in  its  turn  was  influenced  by  them,61 
and  in  the  second  place  by  the  fact  that  it  is  not  always  pos- 
sible to  say  which  group  a  given  man  belongs  to:  thus  we 
have  classed  Pythagoras  and  Empedocles  in  the  "  Orphic " 
group,  though  they  are  generally  called  philosophers,  and 
other  sides  of  their  doctrine,  which  we  have  ignored,  certainly 
entitle  them  to  such  a  name.  But  in  general  the  philosophers 
paid  but  little  attention  to  the  old  beliefs  about  purification 
and  fasting  and  asceticism;  the  most  that  they  did  was  to 
develop  doctrines  which  were  later  utilized  for  this  purpose 
by  others.  Heraclitus  was  one  of  the  few  who  did  mention 

ei  Bob.  Eisler,  Weltmantel  und  Himmelszelt,  ii  pp.  661ff.,  693-706; 
Cornford,  From,  Religion  to  Philosophy,  chap,  vi;  Kern,  in  Hermes,  xxv 
Iff.;  Diels,  in  Archiv  f.  Gesch.  d.  Phil,  ii  91ff.;  Bui-net,  op.  cit.,  index 
s.v.  Orphics. 


47 

these  purifications,  and  what  he  said  was  "those  who  when 
stained  purify  themselves  with  blood  do  as  if  some  one  who 
had  stepped  into  the  mud  should  wash  himself  with  mud."62 
These  pre-Socratic  philosophers  did  render  one  service, 
however.  They  supplied  the  word  asceticism.  The  original 
meaning  of  the  word  acr/celv)  as  used  by  Homer,  was  to 
"work"  or  "fashion"  raw  materials.  Thus  he  speaks  of 
"working"  wool  (r]cncdv  eipia,  7888)  and  of  "worked"  yarn 
(vr^ia  aa-KrjTos,  A134).  From  this  was  derived  a  secondary 
meaning,  to  work  upon  oneself,  that  is,  to  "practice"  or 
"  exercise  "  and  especially  to  "  train."  Now  from  the  days 
of  Hesiod,  it  had  been  taught  in  Greece  that  virtue  could 
be  attained  only  by  labor.63  Democritus  gave  the  name 
acr/crjcris  to  this  sort  of  labor.  While  he  also  uses  the  word  in 
other  senses,64  he  says  in  one  passage  that  "more  are  good 
from  training,  asceticism  (ao-fcrjcris),  than  nature."65  Simi- 
larly Protagoras  says  that  "one  should  receive  education 
from  nature  and  training."66  This  was  therefore  the  mean- 
ing of  the  word  "  asceticism "  when  it  was  first  introduced 
into  the  vocabulary  of  philosophy. 

«2Frg.  5  Diels. 

«3  Hes.  Op.  287ff.:  T^  »kv  TOI  KaK^ra  Kctl  l\adov  t<mv  e\e<n?m 
pijidlus  '  AetTj  pat  656s,  /udXtt  5'  tyyvdi  vaiei. ' 
TTJS  8    dpCTTjs  idp&TCt  $eot  TrpOTrapoidev  Wi]K.av 
bdavaroi '  jjictupos  8e  Koi  6pi9ios  olfnos  es  avTJfv 
Kctl  rpTjxt'S  r6  Trpcorof  '  tirriv  5*  ets  aKpov  'iKijrai, 
pr)L8iij  5i)  eTreiTo:  TreXci,  xa\€-n-i]  irep  tov<ra. 

"Thus  in  one  place  (frg.  110),  he  uses  it  in  conjunction  with  \6yos 
for  "to  talk."  The  same  meaning  of  "use"  is  given  the  word  in 
frg.  53  a. 

«5  Frg.  242 :  irAcom  e£  &<TKriaios  ayadol  ylyovrai  r)  &ir6  ^ucrtos. 
««Frg.  3:  ^uo-ecos  Kai  dcr^o-ecos  SiSaffKotXice  SeiTet.Cf.  frg.  10;  Critias,  frg. 
9.    Cf.  Capelle,  in  Neue  Jahrto.  /.  Tel.  Alt.,  25  (1910),  p.  697,  n.  2. 


CHAPTEE   III 
ASCETICISM  IN  PLATO 

The  preceding  chapters  of  this  essay  have  been  devoted  to 
a  study  of  the  ascetic  features  of  the  religion  of  early  Greece. 
We  have  found  numerous  interdictions  of  the  most  elementary 
sort,  greatly  resembling  the  taboos  found  among  all  primitive 
peoples ;  we  have  seen  that  any  approach  of  such  interdicted 
things  to  a  person  polluted  that  person ;  he  who  would  remain 
pure  had  to  keep  away  from  them.  It  has  also  been  seen 
that  a  person  polluted  in  this  way  had  to  undergo  purifica- 
tions which  were  sometimes  of  a  most  stringent  sort,  demand- 
ing acts  of  veritable  asceticism.  An  unusual  degree  of  purity 
was  demanded  before  important  religious  acts,  the  attainment 
of  which  required,  at  times,  fasting  and  continence.  It  has 
been  seen,  too,  that  back  of  practices  was  a  belief  in  evil 
spirits,  which  were  supposed  to  reside  in  the  tabooed  things, 
and  which  attached  themselves  to  a  person's  body  whenever 
they  got  a  chance,  polluting  it  and  thus  making  it  impossible 
for  that  person  to  approach  sacred  things ;  back  of  the  whole 
thing,  therefore,  was  a  division  of  the  world,  or  at  least  of 
the  spiritual  world,  into  two  parts,  one  good  and  the  other 
bad,  one  fas  and  the  other  nefas,  and  the  belief  that  these  two 
worlds,  or  two  orders  of  spirits  were  so  radically  hetero- 
geneous that  they  could  not  even  approach  one  another.  As 
to  the  why  and  the  wherefore  of  all  this,  these  primitive 
peoples  did  not  ask;  persons  in  their  intellectual  stage  seem 
to  take  it  pretty  much  for  granted. 

During  the  seventh  and  sixth  centuries,  however,  a  new 
religious  movement  came  over  Greece,  which  was  marked  by 
the  appearance  of  new  cults,  and  which  showed  a  great  ad- 

48 


49 

vance  in  the  religious  development  of  Greece.  One  example 
of  these  new  cults  is  found  in  Orphism.  The  followers  of 
this  religion  retained  the  old  rites  and  purifications  and 
abstinences,  but  explained  them  by  the  theological  system 
which  we  outlined  above :  a  theory  of  the  world  was  drawn  up 
which  made  asceticism  seem  not  only  a  natural  but  also  a 
highly  desirable  thing. 

But  there  is  still  a  third  stage  in  the  evolution  of  early 
Greek  ascetical  thought,  and  after  that,  as  will  be  seen,  there 
was  very  little  for  succeeding  generations  to  add.  This  third 
stage  is  found  in  the  asceticism  of  Plato;  in  it,  the  ascetic 
tendencies  which  we  have  been  studying  were  united  and 
clarified  and  reduced  to  a  theory,  and  this  theory  so  closely 
united  with  the  then  universally  accepted  theory  of  the  world, 
that  Plato's  thought  remained  the  source  from  which  ascetical 
theologians  drew  their  doctrines  for  centuries  to  come.  It 
is  therefore  of  the  highest  importance  for  us  to  understand 
Plato's  doctrine  on  the  subject.  But  this  portion  of  his  phi- 
losophy is  so  closely  related  to  all  the  rest,  and  his  whole 
philosophy  is  in  a  way  so  much  the  product  of  his  time,  that 
we  must  have  these  accompanying  features  clearly  in  mind 
before  turning  to  his  strictly  ascetical  thought. 

The  gradual  expansion  of  Greece  during  the  eighth  and 
following  centuries,  and  the  effect  which  this  had  upon  the 
development  of  Greek  religion  and  thought,  have  already  been 
noted.  In  the  fifth  century  this  process  continued  at  an  even 
more  rapid  rate,  and  at  the  same  time  numerous  internal 
causes  cooperated  to  bring  about  even  greater  upheavals  in 
Greece.  As  the  present  study  is  not  a  social  history  of  Greece, 
there  is  no  need  for  describing  these  developments  in  detail, 
and  it  will  be  sufficient  to  say  that  after  the  times  of  Marathon 
and  Salamis,  new  tendencies  appeared  and  nothing  was  ever 
quite  the  same  in  Greece  again.  The  old  petty  rivalries  of 
the  city-states  tended  to  be  forgotten  to  a  certain  extent,  and 
the  new  ideal  of  Hellas  began  to  arise;  the  isolated  agri- 
5 


50 

cultural  communities  began  to  break  up,  and  with  them  de- 
parted the  old  superstitions  which  had  formerly  bound  men ; 
an  era  of  enlightenment  ensued — an  era  to  which  no  parallel 
can  be  found  previous  to  the  nineteenth  century.  The  new 
demands  for  education  brought  into  being  a  new  class  of  men, 
called  Sophists,  whose  business  it  was  to  impart  this  educa- 
tion. During  the  fifth  century,  these  sophists  were  the  in- 
tellectual leaders  of  Greece,  and  it  was  their  liberalizing 
instruction  which  brought  about  the  intellectual  revolution 
of  the  century — it  is  a  most  noteworthy  fact  that  the  true 
nature  of  the  sophists  was  first  recognized,  and  that  they  were 
first  raised  from  the  general  opprobrium  to  which  Plato's 
diatribes  had  consigned  them  for  a  period  of  over  two  thou- 
sand years,  by  a  historian,  Grote,  who  was  himself  a  radical 
of  much  the  same  sort,  and  that  the  most  brilliant  account 
of  their  work  which  we  possess  was  written  by  another  still 
more  radically-minded  thinker,  Gilbert  Murray.1  It  is  hard 
for  us  to  imagine  the  revolutionary  effect  which  this  teaching 
must  have  had  upon  Greece,  and  particularly  upon  Athens, 
but  as  it  is  hard  to  find  anything  that  was  immune  from  their 
criticism,  its  consequences  must  indeed  have  been  far-reach- 
ing :  when  Protagoras  taught  that  "  man  is  the  measure  of  all 
things,"  pretty  much  all  the  old  moral  values  must  already 
have  been  overthrown.  The  sophists  at  least  brought  intel- 
lectual freedom,  but  perhaps  they  brought  anarchy  too.  Then 
came  the  Peloponnesian  War,  and  Athens  was  defeated.  In 
spite  of  her  freedom,  in  spite  of  her  enlightenment,  in  spite  of 
her  culture,  in  spite  of  her  lofty  ideals,  such  as  those  ex- 
pressed in  Pericles' s  funeral  oration,  Athens  was  defeated. 
Though  no  doubt  her  soldiers  were  just  as  brave  and  just  as 
strong  as  her  enemies',  something  was  wrong;  some  people 
laid  this  to  the  work  of  the  sophists,  which,  they  claimed,  had 
weakened  Athens.  Perhaps  they  were  right,  too;  perhaps 

i  Grote,  History  of  Greece,  chap.  Mi;  Murray,  Euripides  and  Ms  Age, 
pp.  44—58  and  passim. 


51 

the  sophists  were  partially  to  blame  for  the  eternal  quibbling 
which  was  Athens's  ruin;  perhaps  it  is  true  that  the  ideals 
which  they  taught,  though  lofty,  were  '  machtlos/  were  unable 
to  inspire  men  to  put  forth  their  best  efforts,  to  sacrifice  any- 
thing and  everything  for  their  sake,  and  that  from  that  ultra- 
pragmatic  point  of  view  which  teaches  that  truth  is  not  only 
what  ' works'  but  also  what  makes  us  work,  they  were  de- 
ficient. At  any  rate,  as  soon  as  the  war  was  over,  it  became 
evident  that  further  intellectual  reform  was  an  urgent  neces- 
sity, and  at  just  this  moment  Plato  appeared. 

Plato  was  descended  from  one  of  the  old  aristocratic  fami- 
lies of  Athens,2  and  of  his  loyalty  to  his  city,  we  can  have 
no  doubt.  The  old  story  of  the  heroic  deeds  of  the  Athenians 
in  times  forgotten,  which  he  relates  at  the  beginning  of  the 
Timaeus,  is  a  proof  of  this.  In  one  passage3  he  speaks  very 
highly  of  Isocrates,  singling  him  out  from  among  all  the 
sophists  as  one  who  might  eventually  come  to  be  something, 
which  might  suggest  that  Plato  was  interested  in  the  pan- 
Hellenism  of  the  fourth  century,  of  which  Isocrates  was  so 
eminent  an  advocate,  but  in  any  case  his  first  loyalty  was 
always  to  Athens.  He  was  not  blind  to  the  faults  of  her 
citizens,  and  was  perfectly  willing  to  criticise  many  of  the 
things  which  they  held  dear,  but  notwithstanding  this, 
passages  too  numerous  to  mention,  in  which  he  speaks  of  her 
beauty  and  grandeur,  should  convince  us  that  the  fate  of 
Athens  was  always  near  his  heart.  But,  as  has  been  pointed 
out,  Athens  had  just  been  defeated;  this  fact,  and  his  love 
for  his  city,  were  the  main-springs  of  all  Plato's  activity. 
His  great  purpose  in  all  his  work  was  to  rehabilitate  the  city 
in  its  ancient  splendor,  and  to  make  possible  once  more  that 
former  glory,  which  now  seemed  to  be  gone.  Our  first  witness 
is  the  attention  he  gave  to  political  philosophy,  and  his  efforts 

2  See   Plato's   genealogy,   given    in   Burnet,    Greek   Philosophy   from 
Thales  to  Plato,  Part  I,  p.  351. 
sPhaedr.  279. 


52 

to  conceive  an  ideal  state  which  would  point  out  to  his  fellow- 
citizens  how  to  make  their  city  great  again ;  the  attention  he 
gives  to  defenders,  to  military  preparedness,  shows  where  his 
real  interest  lay.  Again,  his  antipathy  to  the  sophists  is  thus 
explained ;  others  at  the  time  were  blaming  them  for  Athens's 
weakness,  and  it  is  probably  the  case  that  Plato,  too,  all  un- 
consciously perhaps,4  felt  that  they,  and  especially  their 
damnable  teaching,  were  to  blame  for  his  city's  fall,  and  that 
he  hated  them  accordingly.  At  any  rate,  his  onslaught  upon 
their  ideas  is  enough  to  show  that  he  felt  that  it  was  a  matter 
of  the  highest  concern  that  they  should  be  refuted ;  why  was 
he  so  zealous  in  this,  if  not  that  he  thought  that  it  would  do 
some  good  to  somebody? 

It  was  a  firm  belief  of  Plato,  and  of  the  Greeks  in  general, 
that  to  act  rightly,  one  must  think  correctly,  that  right  think- 
ing  precedes  right  acting:  if  men  do  wrong,  it  is  because 
they  think  wrong.  Thus  Plato  says  that  "  no  man  is  volun- 
tarily bad ;  but  the  bad  become  bad  by  reason  of  an  ill  disposi- 
tion of  the  body  and  bad  education."  Consequently,  if  one 
would  improve  morally,  he  should  improve  himself  intel- 
lectually ;  a  few  lines  below,  Plato  continues,  "  we  should 
endeavour  as  far  as  we  can  by  education,  and  studies,  and 
learning,  to  avoid  vice  and  attain  virtue."5  It  is  no  wonder, 
then,  that  when  Plato  set  out  to  better  the  condition  of  his 
city,  he  first  attacked  what  he  considered  a  vicious  philosophy 
and  then  urged  the  study  of  true  philosophy.  Let  us  see 
exactly  what  he  wished  to  reform. 

The  sophists  had  been  radical  empiricists :  they  had  main- 
tained that  nothing  existed  which  could  not  be  perceived  by 
the  senses.  Thus  Protagoras  taught  that  "  man  is  the  meas- 
ure of  all  things."  Carried  into  the  moral  field,  this  doc- 

*  Cf .  Eep.  VI  492,  where  it  is  denied  that  the  sophists  were  corruptors 
of  youth.  But  cf.  the  parable  of  the  mutinous  crew  (§  488)  which  is 
rather  obviously  directed  at  the  Athenians,  and  especially  the  spirit  of 
the  sophists. 

s  Tim.  86,  87.     Here,  as  elsewhere,  Jowett  's  translation  is  followed. 


53 

trine  led  to  a  denial  of  the  existence  of  moral  ideals,  goodness, 
justice  and  the  like;  Euripides  was  then  able  to  say  that 
"nothing  is  either  good  or  bad,  but  thinking  makes  it  so." 
It  was  this  denial  of  the  real  existence  of  ideals  which  aroused 
Plato's  greatest  antagonism,  and  we  shall  see  that  his  affirma- 
tion of  their  real  and  absolute  existence  is  the  very  heart  of 
his  philosophy. 

There  was  a  second  doctrine  which  was  a  particular  abomi- 
nation to  Plato:  this  was  Heraclitus's  teaching  that  nothing 
is  stationary,  but  that  everything  flows.  In  Plato's  day,  it 
was  only  too  obvious  a  fact  that  everything  was  changing,  and 
this  was  the  cause  of  his  concern.  It  was  true  that  many 
things,  yes,  all  visible  things  did  change  incessantly,  but 
Plato  would  not  admit  that  there  was  absolutely  nothing 
stable,  nothing  enduring  in  the  whole  universe.  When  this 
doctrine  of  eternal  change  was  applied  to  everything — to  the 
ideals  of  the  good,  the  true,  the  beautiful,  and  the  like — 
people  were  going  too  far,  it  seemed,  and  Plato  protested.  If 
there  really  were  nothing  constant  and  in  the  world,  then 
science,  knowledge,  learning  from  experience,  law,  justice, 
and  society  itself  would  be  impossible,  and  perhaps  the  then 
unhappy  state  of  the  Athenians  was  due  to  their  great  desire 
for  change.  Plato,  on  the  other  hand,  held  that  there  was 
much  that  was  desirable  in  the  past,  and  tried  to  show  that 
there  were  things  which  were  unchanging. 

This  leads  us  to  a  third  point :  the  sophists,  like  the  philoso- 
phers who  preceded  them,  had  but  little  respect  for  the  reli- 
gion of  the  past — as  was  but  natural.  But  this  did  not  seem 
quite  right  to  Plato  either.  To  be  sure,  he  would  have  been 
glad  enough  to  get  rid  of  the  Olympians  and  their  chronique 
scandaleuse ,  but  it  seemed  to  him  that  there  was  much  that 
was  worth  preserving  in  the  old  religion  of  his  people.  There 
is  a  sort  of  piety  that  runs  through  the  dialogues  which  is 
hardly  what  we  should  expect  from  the  rationalizing  and  em- 
pirical sophists — "I  too  believe  that  the  gods  are  our  guar- 


54 

dians,  and  that  we  are  a  possession  of  theirs/'  said  Socrates.6 
Moreover,  in  certain  portions  of  his  work,  the  influence  of 
old  Orphic  ideas  is  very  marked:  it  will  presently  be  seen 
that  his  doctrine  of  asceticism  was  taken  over  from  them 
almost  en  bloc.  It  should  be  remembered,  also,  that  his 
teacher  Socrates  had  been  identified  with  the  Orphics  by 
Aristophanes,  in  his  Clouds,  so  it  may  be  that  Plato  got  these 
ideas  from  his  master.  At  any  rate,  there  will  be  numerous 
occasions  for  showing  his  close  affinity  with  the  Orphics. 

These  two  points — the  existence  of  unchanging  ideals  and 
the  return  to  Orphism — might  lead  one  to  suppose  that  it  is 
our  intention  to  show  that  Plato  wished  to  return  to  the  "  good 
old  times"  before  the  sophists  came  and  upset  things,  but 
this  is  not  at  all  the  case:  no  one  could  maintain  that  the 
author  of  the  Republic  was  a  dyed-in-the-wool  reactionary. 
In  fact,  it  is  only  after  the  criticism  of  the  sophists  that  Plato 
could  think  for  a  minute  of  accepting  the  old  Orphic  tales: 
of  course  they  were  not  true,  and  so  long  as  any  one  was  in 
danger  of  taking  them  as  such,  it  would  be  impossible  to  make 
any  use  of  them.  But  when  he  is  sure  that  nobody  will  take 
them  literally,  when  all  will  agree  with  him  that  one  cannot 
"  affirm  that  this  is  exactly  true — a  man  of  sense  ought  hardly 
to  say  that,"  then  he  can  approach  them  with  a  free  mind  and 
find  a  valuable  lesson  in  them.  Plato  is  able  to  say,  for  ex- 
ample, that  "  he  was  not  a  bad  genealogist  who  said  that  Iris 
the  messenger  of  heaven  is  the  child  of  Thaumas  (wonder),"7 
and  on  other  occasions  to  call  upon  them  for  more  important 
contributions  than  that,  but  this  was  possible  only  after  the 
negative  criticism  of  the  sophists.  As  an  eminent  French 
critic  has  remarked,  "  sans  Voltaire,  Renan  etait  impossible. 
II  a  fallu  nier  avec  colere  avant  de  pouvoir  nier  avec  sym- 
pathie.  II  f allait  que  le  pouvoir  de  1'Eglise  fut  detruit,  pour 
qu'on  put  rendre  justice  a  la  religion  sans  y  croire."8  That 
is  just  what  Plato  did. 

«  Phaed.  62. 

i  Theaet.  155. 

s  Lanson,  Histoire  de  la  litterature  fran$aise,  p.  772. 


55 

These  preliminary  remarks  should  enable  us  to  understand 
the  real  nature  of  Plato's  philosophy.  While  there  is  no 
need  to  go  into  details  about  the  logic  of  Plato's  system  of 
ideas,  it  must  be  briefly  outlined,  if  we  are  to  understand  his 
"  other-worldliness,"  which  was  at  the  foundation  of  his  doc- 
trine of  asceticism. 

The  fundamental  doctrine  in  Plato's  entire  system  is  the 
real  existence  of  ideals,  that  is,  of  an  absolute  good,  an  abso- 
lute justice,  etc.  "  There  is  nothing  which  to  my  mind  is  so 
evident  as  that  beauty,  good  and  other  notions  have  a  most 
real  and  absolute  existence."9  The  ideas  which  we  have  of 
such  things  are  at  best  but  feeble  copies  of  these :  "  there  is  no 
light  in  the  earthly  copies  of  justice  or  temperance  or  any  of 
the  other  higher  qualities  which  are  precious  to  souls:  they 
are  seen  but  through  a  glass  dimly;  and  there  are  few  who, 
going  to  the  images,  behold  in  them  the  realities,  and  they 
with  difficulty."10  The  feeble  copies  of  these  ideas  which  are 
in  our  own  minds  bear  the  same  relation  to  the  absolute  ideas 
that  a  reflection  in  water  or  a  looking-glass  does  to  the  object 
reflected.11  So  far,  Platonic  ideas  are  seen  to  be  only  really- 
existing  ideals,  things  whose  existence  some  persons  would 
deny  ("  the  uninitiated,  who  believe  in  nothing  but  what  they 
hold  fast  in  their  hands"12);  Plato  maintained  that  they 
really  did  exist  as  absolute  ideas.  But  he  did  not  stop  there. 
He  went  on,  and  spoke  of  the  idea  of  a  shuttle13  or  a  bed,14 
and  even  spoke  of  the  "  pattern  "  which  "  the  artificer  had  in 
view  when  he  made  the  world."15  But  this  was  only  an  ex- 
tension of  the  doctrine;  the  heart  of  it,  and  nearly  all  the 
examples,  relate  to  moral  entities,  or  as  we  should  say,  to 
ideals. 

«  Phaed.  77. 

10  Phaedr.  249. 

11  Eep.  VI  515. 

12  Theaet.  155. 
is  Cratyl.  393. 
i*  Eep.  X  596. 
IB  Tim.  29. 


56 

Thus  he  arrives  at  the  conception  of  a  dual  world :  the  sen- 
sible or  visible  world,  and  the  world  of  ideas,  or  the  intelli- 
gible world.  But  the  intelligible  world  is  not  only  the  world 
of  ideas ;  it  is  also  the  world  of  changeless  things ;  moreover, 
it  is  the  only  real  world.  "  That  which  is  apprehended  by 
reflection  and  reason  always  is,  and  is  the  same ;  that,  on  the 
other  hand,  which  is  conceived  by  opinion  with  the  help  of 
sensation  and  without  reason,  is  in  a  process  of  becoming  and 
perishing,  but  never  really  is."16  So  there  can  be  no  doubt 
as  to  the  infinite  superiority  of  the  intelligible  world  over  the 
sensible  one,  and  the  highest  aspiration  that  a  man  can  have 
is  to  live  in  this  other,  superior,  ideal  world. 

"  This  is  that  life  above  all  others  which  a  man  should  live,  in 
the  contemplation  of  beauty  absolute ;  a  beauty  which  if  you  once 
beheld,  you  would  see  not  to  be  after  the  measure  of  gold,  and 
garments,  and  fair  boys  and  youths,  which  when  you  now  behold 
you  are  in  fond  amazement,  and  you  and  many  a  one  are  content 
to  live  seeing  only  and  conversing  with  them  without  meat  or 
drink,  if  that  were  possible.  ...  In  that  communion  only,  be- 
holding beauty  with  the  eye  of  the  mind,  he  will  be  enabled  to 
bring  forth,  not  images  of  beauty,  but  realities.  .  .  .  Would  that 
be  an  ignoble  life?"17 

But  how  is  a  man  to  live  this  life  "  in  the  contemplation 
of  beauty  absolute  "  ?  This  leads  us  to  a  discussion  of  Plato's 
anthropology.  Like  the  world,  man  is  dual:  just  as  "the 
seen  is  the  changing  and  the  unseen  the  unchanging,"  so  "  the 
soul  is  more  like  the  unseen,  and  the  body  to  the  seen."18 
"  The  soul  is  the  very  likeness  of  the  divine  and  immortal, 
and  intelligible,  and  uniform,  and  indissoluble,  and  unchange- 
able; and  the  body  is  the  very  likeness  of  the  human,  and 
mortal,  and  unintelligible,  and  multiform,  and  dissoluble  and 
changeable."19  Thus  we  find  the  two  parts  of  man,  the  soul 

16  Tim.  28. 
IT  Symp.  211-2. 
is  Phaed.  79. 
i»  Phaed.  80. 


57 

and  the  body,  of  which  the  soul  is  unquestionably  the  superior 
part ;  it  would  be  better  if  the  body  could  be  dispensed  with 
altogether. 

"  The  soul  is  dragged  by  the  body  into  the  region  of  the  change- 
able, and  wanders  and  is  confused;  the  world  spins  round  her, 
and  she  is  like  ,a  drunkard  when  under  their  [the  senses']  influ- 
ence. .  .  .  But  when  returning  into  herself  she  reflects,  then  she 
passes  into  the  realm  of  purity,  and  eternity,  and  immortality, 
and  unchangeableness,  which  are  her  kindred,  and  with  them  she 
ever  lives,  when  she  is  by  herself  and  is  not  let  or  hindered ;  then 
she  ceases  from  her  erring  ways,  and  being  in  communion  with 
the  unchanging  is  unchanging."20 

The  similarity  with  Orphic  views  is  obvious  here,  but  it 
becomes  still  more  so  if  we  turn  to  his  theory  of  how  the  soul 
came  to  be  in  the  body,  for  he,  as  they,  believed  in  a  Fall  and 
that  the  body  is  a  punishment.  He  speaks  of  a  former  "  state 
of  innocence,  shining  in  pure  light,  pure  ourselves  and  not 
yet  enshrined  in  that  living  tomb  which  we  carry  about,  now 
that  we  are  imprisoned  in  the  body,  as  in  an  oyster-shell.  Let 
me  linger  thus  long  over  the  memory  of  scenes  that  have 
passed  away.7'21 

Connected  with  this  is  his  further  acceptance  of  the  Orphic 
doctrine  of  the  transmigration  of  souls.  Like  the  Orphics, 
Plato  believed  not  only  in  rewards  and  punishments  after 
death  for  acts  committed  during  this  life — "  for  I  have  good 
hope  that  there  is  yet  something  remaining  for  the  dead,  and 
as  has  been  said  of  old,  something  far  better  for  the  good  than 
for  the  evil"22 — but  he  also  believed  in  the  transmigration 
of  souls  into  higher  or  lower  animals,  or  else  advance  to  fel- 
lowship with  the  gods  after  death:  low  persons  after  death 
enter  into  asses,  wolves,  etc.,  "but  he  who  is  a  philosopher 
or  lover  of  learning,  and  is  entirely  pure  at  departing,  is  alone 

20  Phaed.  79. 

21  Phaedr.  250. 

22  Phaed.  83,  cf.  107ff.,  esp.  113. 


58 

permitted  to  reach  the  gods."23  I  am  "persuaded,"  says 
Socrates,  "that  I  am  going  to  other  gods  who  are  wise  and 
good  (of  this  I  am  as  certain  as  I  can  be  of  anything  of  the 
sort),  and  to  men  departed  (though  I  am  not  so  certain  of 
this)  and  are  better  than  those  whom  I  leave  behind."24  In 
the  Phaedrus,  again,  he  develops  at  length  his  theory  of  the 
Fall  from  seeing  the  truth,  the  struggle  to  attain  that  happy 
state  again,  and  the  passage,  meantime,  through  various  ani- 
mals: ordinary  people  will  return  to  their  former  state  of 
bliss  after  10,000  years,  but  lovers  and  philosophers  after 
only  3,000.25 

This  gives  us  a  hint  as  to  what  Plato  considered  the  way 
of  progress,  the  way  to  purify  oneself  and  return  to  one's 
original  exalted  state,  as  to  what  he  considered  man's  highest 
activity:  this  was  philosophic  speculation.  In  good  Greek 
wise,  he  held  that  the  only  way  to  have  one  act  correctly  was 
to  have  him  think  correctly,  whence  the  great  emphasis  he 
placed  upon  philosophy:  teaching  this  was,  according  to  his 
opinion,  the  only  way  to  improve  men.  Therefore  he  re- 
quires that  the  guardians  of  his  ideal  state  shall  be  philoso- 
phers :  it  is  the  highest  form  of  activity  which  any  man  can 
follow:  the  finer  sort  of  minds  identify  wisdom  and  the 
good.26  This  is  the  ultimate  standard  of  value :  "  is  there  not 
one  coin  for  which  all  things  ought  to  exchange? — that  is 
wisdom ;  and  only  in  exchange  for  this,  and  in  company  with 
this,  is  anything  truly  bought  or  sold,  whether  courage  or 
temperance  or  justice."27  Elsewhere,  he  says  that  "the 
study  of  philosophy  is  the  noblest  and  best  music."28  "  For 
'  many/  as  they  say  in  the  mysteries,  '  are  the  thyrsus-bearers, 
but  few  are  the  mystics/ — meaning,  as  I  interpret  the  words, 

23  Phaed.  81. 
2*  Phaed.  63. 

25  Phaedr.  248-9. 

26  Eep.  VI 505. 
2T  Phaed.  69. 
28  Phaed.  61. 


59 

the  true  philosophers."29  Phaedms  is  made  to  say,  "What 
motive  has  a  pnan  to  live  if  not  for  the  pleasures  of  discourse  ? 
Surely  he  would  not  live  for  the  sake  of  bodily  pleasures, 
which  are  rightly  called  slavish."30 

"  And  therefore  the  mind  of  the  philosopher  alone  has  wings ; 
and  this  is  just,  for  he  is  always,  according  to  the  measure  of  his 
abilities,  clinging  in  recollection  to  those  things  in  which  God 
abides,  and  in  believing  which  he  is  what  he  is.  And  he  who 
employs  aright  these  memories  is  ever  being  initiated  into  perfect 
mysteries  and  alone  becomes  perfect.  But  as  he  forgets  earthly 
interests  and  is  rapt  in,  the  divine,  the  vulgar  deem  him  mad, 
and  rebuke  him ;  they  do  not  see  that  he  is  inspired."31 

But,  after  all,  the  ,best  proof  of  what  Plato  thought  of 
philosophers  and  their  work  is  shown  by  the  glorious  future 
which  he  promised  them. 

"  He  who  has  lived  as  a  true  philosopher  has  reason  to  be  of 
good  cheer  when  he  is  about  to  die,  and  after  death  he  may  hope 
to  receive  the  greatest  good  in  the  other  world."32 

"Those  who  are  remarkable  for  having  led  holy  lives  are  re- 
leased from  this  earthly  prison,  and  go  to  their  pure  home,  which 
is  above,  and  dwell  in  the  purer  earth ;  and  those  who  have  duly 
purified  themselves  with  philosophy  live  henceforth  altogether 
without  the  body,  in  mansions  fairer  far  than  these,  which  may 
not  be  described,  and  of  which  time  would  fail  me  to  tell.  ...  I 
do  not  mean  to  affirm  that  the  description  which  I  have  given  of 
the  soul  and  her  mansions  is  exactly  true — a  man  of  sense  ought 
hardly  to  say  that.  But  I  do  say  that,  inasmuch  as  the  soul  is 
shown  to  be  immortal,  he  may  venture  to  think,  not  improperly 
or  unworthily,  that  something  of  the  kind  is  true.  The  adventure 
is  a  glorious  one,  and  he  ought  to  comfort  himself  with  words 
like  these,  which  is  the  reason  why  I  lengthen  out  the  tale. 
Wherefore,  I  say,  let  a  man  be  of  good  cheer  about  his  soul,  who 

2»  Phaed.  69. 
so  Phaedr.  258. 
si  Phaedr.  249. 
32  Phaed.  64. 


60 

has  cast  away  the  pleasures  and  ornaments  of  the  body  as  alien  to 
him,  and  rather  hurtful  in  their  effects,  and  has  followed  after 
the  pleasures  of  knowledge  in  this  life ;  who  has  adorned  the  soul 
in  her  own  proper  jewels,  which  are  temperance,  and  justice,  and 
courage,  and  truth — in  these  arrayed  she  is  ready  to  go  on  her 
journey  to  the  world  below,  when  her  time  comes."33 

But  it  must  not  be  assumed  that  everybody  was  supposed 
to  be  a  philosopher,  or  even  could  be  one :  only  a  chosen  few 
might  aspire  to  such  a  rank.  Others,  if  they  attempted  phi- 
losophy, would  only  degrade  it,  as  the  sophists  did :  "  all 
those  mercenary  adventurers,  whom  the  world  calls  Sophists 
and  rivals,  do  but  teach  the  collective  opinion  of  the  many, 
which  are  the  opinions  of  their  assemblies ;  and  this  is  their 
wisdom.7'34  "  The  world  cannot  possibly  be  a  philosopher  ? 
Impossible.  And  therefore  philosophers  must  inevitably  fall 
under  the  censure  of  the  world?  They  must."35  All  can- 
not be  philosophers,  but  he  that  is  able  to  receive  it,  let  him 
receive  it. 

Such,  then,  seem  to  have  been  the  fundamental  concepts  of 
Plato's  philosophy:  the  real  existence  of  ideas,  and  particu- 
larly of  ideals,  which  form  a  separate  and  superior  world,  and 
which  are  known  by  the  mind  alone;  the  inability  of  most 
people  to  see  these  clearly,  or  at  all;  the  ability  of  the  phi- 
losopher to  see  them,  and  the  joy  which  this  gives  him,  both 
here  and  hereafter.  Let  us  see  how  all  this  is  connected  with 
his  asceticism. 

In  the  first  place,  we  must  point  out  that  though  there  are 
many  passages,  some  of  which  we  shall  quote,  which  teach  a 
depreciation  of  the  body,  there  are  also  many  which  encour- 
age its  development,  which  teach  the  ideal  of  a  "mens  sana 
in  corpore  sano."  He  never  criticises  gymnastics,  but  he  fre- 
quently does  praise  them :  "  that  is  the  best  of  the  purifica- 
tions of  the  body  which  is  effected  by  gymnastic."36 

as  Phaed.  115. 
s*  Eep.  VI  493. 
ss  Eep.  494. 
se  Tim.  89. 


61 

"But  the  fair  mind  in  the  fair  body  will  be  the  fairest  and 
loveliest  sight  to  him  who  has  the  seeing  eye.  .  .  .  [To  attain 
this]  we  should  not  move  the  body  without  the  soul  or  the  soul 
without  the  body,  and  thus  they  will  aid  one  another  and  be 
healthy  and  well  balanced.  And  therefore  the  mathematician 
or  anyone  else  who  devotes  himself  to  some  intellectual  pursuit, 
must  allow  his  body  to  have  motion  also,  and  practice  gymnastic ; 
and  he  who  would  train  the  limbs  of  his  body,  should  impart  to 
them  the  motions  of  the  soul,  and  should  practice  music  and  all 
philosophy,  if  he  would  be  called  truly  fair  and  truly  good."37 

These  passages  are  enough  to  show  that  Plato  did  not  share 
in  that  hatred  of  the  body  which  many  ascetics  have  sought  to 
show,  and  that  he  would  never  have  sanctioned  mutilations 
and  the  other  excessive  penances  which  have  at  times  been  in- 
flicted upon  the  body.  None  of  the  texts  cited  below  demand 
much  more  than  that  the  body  be  kept  in  its  proper  place,  and 
that  the  philosopher  attach  no  value  to  it. 

But  notwithstanding  all  this,  one  should  never  forget  that 
"  the  beauty  of  the  mind  is  more  honorable  than  the  beauty 
of  outward  form."38  One  must  remember  that  "in  the  re- 
gion above  the  heavens  is  the  place  of  true  knowledge/'39  and 
that  "no  impure  thing  is  allowed  to  approach  the  pure."40 
Moreover,  "  what  is  purification  but  the  separation  of  the  soul 
from  the  body — but  the  release  of  the  soul  from  the  chains 
of  the  body?  And  the  true  philosophers,  and  they  only, 
study  and  are  eager  to  release  the  soul."41 

"  The  soul  which  is  pure  at  departing  draws  after  her  no  bodily 
taint,  having  never  voluntarily  had  connection  with  the  body, 
which  she  is  ever  avoiding,  herself  gathered  into  herself;  (for 
such  abstraction  has  been  the  study  of  her  life).  And  what  does 

37  Tim.  88. 
ss  Symp.  210. 
39  Phaedr.  247. 
«  Phaed.  67. 
*i  Ibid. 


62 

this  mean  but  that  she  has  been  a  true  disciple  of  philosophy, 
and  has  practiced  how  to  die  easily  ?  "42 

After  death  "the  foolishness  of  the  body  will  be  cleared  away 
and  we  shall  be  pure  and  hold  converse  with  other  pure  souls, 
and  know  of  ourselves  the  clear  light  everywhere;  and  this  is 
surely  the  light  of  truth."43 

"  While  we  are  in  the  body,  and  while  the  soul  is  mingled  with 
this  mass  of  evil,  our  desire  will  not  be  satisfied,  and  our  desire 
is  of  the  truth.  For  the  body  is  a  source  of  endless  trouble  to  us 
by  reason  of  the  mere  requirement  of  food ;  and  also  is  liable  to 
diseases  which  overtake  and  impede  us  in  the  search  after  truth : 
and  by  filling  us  as  full  of  loves,  and  lusts,  and  fears,  and  fancies, 
and  idols,  and  every  sort  of  folly,  prevents  our  ever  having,  as 
people  say,  so  much  as  a  thought."44 

This  reminds  one  of  the  old  Orphic  doctrine  that  the  body 
is  evil,  that  it  is  a  punishment,  that  it  is  a  tomb.  In  fact,  in 
one  place  Socrates  is  made  to  say  that  "  there  is  a  doctrine 
uttered  in  secret  that  man  is  a  prisoner ;  this  is  a  great  mys- 
tery which  I  do  not  quite  understand."45  The  body  is  a 
hindrance  to  the  philosopher. 

Finally,  there  are  a  certain  number  of  passages  which  de- 
scribe even  more  clearly  the  disregard  which  the  true  philoso- 
pher will  have  for  all  things  connected  with  the  body.  I  will 
quote  two  of  them. 

"He  whose  desires  are  drawn  towards  knowledge  in  every 
form  will  be  absorbed  in  the  pleasures  of  the  soul,  and  will  hardly 
feel  bodily  pleasure — I  mean,  if  he  be  a  true  philosopher  and  not 
a  sham  one.  Such  a  one  is  sure  to  be  temperate  and  the  reverse 
of  covetous ;  for  the  motives  which  make  other  men  covetous  and 
also  profuse  in  expenditure,  are  no  part  in  his  character."46 

"  Do  you  think  that  the  philosopher  ought  to  care  about  the 

42  Phaed.  80. 

43  Phaed.  67. 

44  Phaed.  66. 

45  Phaed.  62. 

46  Rep.  VI  485. 


63 

pleasures — if  they  are  to  be  called  pleasures — of  eating  and 
drinking  ? 

"  Certainly  not,  answered  Simias. 

"  And  what  do  you  say  about  the  pleasures  of  love — should  he 
care  about  them? 

ee  By  no  means. 

"  And  will  he  think  much  of  the  other  ways  of  indulging  the 
body,  for  example  the  acquisition  of  costly  raiment,  or  sandals, 
or  other  adornments  of  the  body  ?  Instead  of  caring  about  them, 
will  he  not  rather  despise  anything  more  than  nature  needs? 
Whait  do  you  say  ? 

"I  should  iSay  that  the  true  philosopher  would  despise  them. 

"  Would  you  not  say  that  he  is  entirely  concerned  with  the  soul 
and  not  with  the  body  ?  He  would  like,  so  far  as  he  can,  to  be 
quit  of  the  body  and  turn  to  the  soul. 

"  That  is  true. 

"In  matters  of  this  sort  philosophers,  above  all  other  men, 
may  be  observed  in  every  sort  of  way  to  dissever  the  soul  from  the 
body. 

"  That  is  true. 

"  Whereas,  Simmias,  the  rest  of  the  world  are  of  the  opinion 
that  a  life  which  has  no  bodily  pleasures  and  no  part  in  them  is 
not  worth  having;  but  that  he  who  thinks  nothing  of  bodily 
pleasures  is  almost  as  though  he  were  dead. 

"  That  is  quite  true. 

"  What  again  shall  we  say  of  the  actual  acquirement  of  knowl- 
edge ? — is  the  body,  if  invited  to  share  in  the  inquiry,  a  hinderer 
or  a  helper?  I  mean  to  say,  have  sight  and  hearing  any  truth 
in  them  ?  Are  they  not,  as  the  poets  are  always  telling  us,  inac- 
curate witnesses  ?  and  yet,  if  even  they  are  inaccurate  and  indis- 
tinct, what  is  to  be  said  of  the  other  senses  ? — for  you  will  allow 
that  they  are  the  best  of  them  ? 

"  Certainly,  he  replied. 

"  Then  when  does  the  soul  attain  truth  ? — f or  in  attempting  to 
consider  anything  in  company  with  the  body,  she  is  obviously 
deceived. 

"  Yes,  that  is  true. 


64 

"  And  thought  is  best  when  the  mind  is  gathered  into  herself 
and  none  of  these  things  trouble  her — neither  sounds  nor  sights 
nor  pains  nor  pleasures — when  she  has  as  little  as  possible  to  do 
with  the  body,  and  has  no  bodily  sense  or  feeling,  but  is  aspiring 
after  being? 

"And  in  this  the  philosopher  dishonors  the  body;  his  soul 
runs  away  from  the  body  and  desires  to  be  alone  and  by  herself  ? 

"  That  is  true."47 

In  these  passages,  at  last,  we  come  to  a  truly  ascetic  ideal. 
Here,  at  last,  is  that  complete  inversion  of  the  ordinary  values 
of  the  world  which  is  known  as  asceticism.  Here  is  described 
the  ideal  sage,  rising  above  the  cares  and  worries,  and  also 
above  the  pleasures  and  delights  of  this  world,  that  he  may 
give  himself  over  completely  to  the  contemplation  of  higher 
things.  Here,  too,  is  the  teaching  that  man's  highest  and 
noblest  activity  is  pure  speculation.  And  this  speculation  is 
not  merely  noble,  but  is  also  useful :  the  most  important  men 
in  the  state  were  to  be  the  philosophers.  The  greatest  service 
is  not  rendered  by  those  who  busy  themselves  with  the  affairs 
of  this  world,  but  by  those  who  spend  their  lives  in  the  con- 
templation of  .beauty  absolute  and  absolute  truth  and  all  the 
other  absolute  ideas,  and  who  pass  down  to  their  fellowmen 
the  truths  thus  learned — they  also  serve  who  only  sit  and 
think,  so  the  ascetic  does  not  live  in  vain. 

In  the  preceding  sections  of  our  essay  it  has  been  shown 
how  the  idea  arose  among  the  Greeks  that  there  were  certain 
things  which  it  was  better  not  to  do,  even  though  they  ap- 
peared to  be  harmless  enough  in  themselves:  we  have  seen 
the  old  beliefs  in  evil  demons  which  inhabited  certain  things, 
which  should  therefore  be  avoided;  we  have  seen  how  the 
progress  of  intelligence  made  these  old  beliefs  less  readily 
tenable,  and  how  a  new  interpretation  of  them  became  neces- 
sary, which  taught  the  radical  dualism  of  soul  and  body,  with 
the  great  superiority  of  the  former,  and  the  implication  that 
47  Phaed.  64-5. 


65 

restraining  the  latter  raised  the  former  to  a  more  perfect 
state ;  we  now  come  to  the  consummation  of  this  whole  devel- 
opment. Perhaps  we  should  have  noticed  certain  contribu- 
tions of  the  pre-Socratic  philosophers:  of  Heraclitus  who 
taught  that  Logos,  Reason,  ruled  everything,48  and  of  Anaxa- 
goras,  who  is  said  to  have  been  the  first  to  distinguish  between 
spirit  and  matter;49  probably  these  thinkers  had  a  certain  in- 
fluence upon  Plato,  too.  We  have  also  attempted  to  sketch 
the  social  and  intellectual  conditions  which  led  Plato  to  take 
the  attitude  he  did,  and  to  lay  such  stress  upon  these  ideas 
which,  he  taught,  had  a  real  and  absolute  existence.  So  we 
at  last  arrived  at  Plato's  teaching  of  a  superior  and  invisible 
world  which  is  known  by  the  mind  alone,  but  which  is  so  far 
superior  to  the  sensible  world  that  all  who  can  should  stop 
bothering  greatly  about  the  affairs  of  this  lower  sphere,  and 
seek  only  the  joys  and  pleasures  of  the  world  above.  And 
finally,  we  saw  how  this  doctrine  led  Plato  to  make  statements 
which  have  a  genuinely  ascetic  ring. 

Later  thinkers  had  but  little  to  add.  Aristotle  took  over 
the  conception  that  man's  highest  activity  is  pure  specula- 
tion :  "  perfect  happiness  is  a  species  of  speculative  activity ;  " 
"  animals,  as  being  perfectly  destitute  of  such  activity,  do  not 
participate  in  happiness."  "We  conclude  then  that  happi- 
ness is  coextensive  with  speculation,  and  that  the  greater  a 
person's  power  of  speculation,  the  greater  will  be  his  happi- 
ness, not  as  an  accidental  fact,  but  in  virtue  of  the  specula- 
tion, as  speculation,  is  honorable  in  itself.  Hence  happiness 
must  be  a  kind  of  speculation."  Speculation  is  even  of  a 
divine  nature,  for  "the  activity  of  God  being  preeminently 
blissful  will  be  speculative,  and  if  so,  then  the  human  activity 
which  is  most  nearly  related  to  it  will  be  most  capable  of 
happiness."50  In  later  times  the  Cynics  took  up  this  side  of 

48  Frg.  1,  2  Diels. 

49  Aristot.  Metaph.  I  3,  984b,  15. 
soAristot.  Nic.  Eth.  X  8  (tr.  Welldon). 

6 


66 

the  Socraiic  teaching  which  recommended  the  neglect  and 
depreciation  of  the  body  in  favor  of  activity  of  the  mind,  and 
Socrates  became  their  ideal  sage.  From  them,  the  Stoics 
took  their  ideal  of  detachment  from  worldly  affairs,  and 
finally  the  Christians  took  from  them  and  the  Neo-Platonists 
(and  to  a  certain  extent  from  the  various  pagan  religions 
with  which  they  came  in  contact)  the  ideals  which  went  to 
make  up  the  Christian  saint.  Exactly  how  all  this  took  place 
we  shall  see  in  the  second  part  of  our  study,  but  it  may  be 
remarked  at  present  that  the  whole  work  of  the  Hellenistic 
epoch  consisted  merely  in  an  elaboration  and  exaggeration 
and  popularization  of  ideas  which  have  already  been  observed. 
Before  bringing  our  discussion  to  a  close,  however,  one 
more  thing  must  be  added.  Plato  was  not  only  a  philoso- 
pher, but  also  a  poet,  and  it  may  make  it  a  little  easier  to 
understand  his  ideas  better  if  we  watch  him  approach  them 
from  this  other  poetic  point  of  view  as  well.  In  the  Phaedrus 
he  gives  a  little  myth  which  well  illustrates  his  idea  of  higher 
activity  at  the  expense  of  the  body,  and  of  the  reward  which 
awaits  those  who  do  such  things ;  this  is  the  story  of  the  origin 
of  grasshoppers. 

"  Grasshoppers  are  said  to  have  been  human  beings  in  an  age  be- 
fore the  Muses.  And  when  the  Muses  came  and  song  appeared 
they  were  ravished  with  delight;  and  singing  always,  they  never 
thought  of  eating  and  drinking,  until  at  last  they  forgot  and 
died.  And  now  they  live  again  in  the  grasshoppers ;  and  this  is 
the  return  which  the  Muses  make  to  them — they  hunger  no  more, 
neither  thirst  any  more,  but  are  always  singing  from  the  moment 
they  are  born,  and  never  eating  or  drinking;  and  when  they  die, 
they  go  to  the  Muses  in  heaven/'51 

si  Phaedr.  259. 


PAET  II 

ASCETICISM    IIST    THE    GE^ECO-EOMAN 

WOELD 


CHAPTEE  IV 

EELIGIOUS  ASCETICISM 

During  the  period  immediately  following  the  life  of  Plato, 
a  great  change  came  over  Greece,  which  had  the  most  far- 
reaching  effect  upon,  all  the  phases  of  Greek  life  and  thought. 
Politically  the  old  organization  on  the  basis  of  city-states  was 
wiped  away  by  the  Macedonian  conquest,  while  the  campaigns 
of  Alexander  in  Asia  widened  the  Greek  world  to  an  enor- 
mous extent.  Economically  the  expansion  was  parallel,  and 
Greece  now  became  a  part  of  the  Hellenistic  Empire.  In- 
tellectually the  revolution  was  just  as  great:  it  has  been  seen 
how  the  activity  of  the  sophists  revolutionized  the  intellectual 
life  of  Athens,  changing  the  population  in  less  than  a  cen- 
tury from  a  group  of  superstitious  farmers  into  one  of  the 
most  enlightened  communities  which  the  world  has  ever  seen. 
Though  even  Athens  was  not  able  to  maintain  this  lofty  posi- 
tion permanently,  her  history  during  the  fifth  century  is  but 
an  exaggerated  form  of  what  was  going  on  all  over  Greece  in 
this  and  the  following  period.  This  intellectual  emancipa- 
tion and  the  great  widening  of  the  horizon  which  resulted 
from  Alexander's  conquests  had  so  great  an  effect  that  a  new 
period  in  the  history  of  Greek  thought  must  date  from  the 
end  of  the  fourth  century. 

This  social  revolution  was  observable  in  all  the  phases  of 
Greek  life,  but  nowhere  was  it  more  evident  than  in  religion. 

67 


68 


I 


After  the  criticism  of  the  sophists,  the  old  beliefs  in  the  Olymp- 
ian gods  were  no  longer  tenable  for  enlightened  persons,  the  old 
religion  was  undermined,  and  men  had  to  find  a  new  one.  This 
constant  search  for  a  new  religion  is  the  most  important  and 
most  characteristic  feature  of  the_  Hellenistic  Age.  Some 
people  tried  to  revive  old  popular  cults,  and  were  to  a  certain 
extent  successful.  Eleusis  continued  to  play  an  important 
role  in  the  Greek  religious  life;  the  Orphics  continued  to 
attract  a  certain  number  of  persons.  The  cults  of  gods  who 
had  formerly  been  rather  insignificant,  such  as  Asculapius 
or^Hercules,  were  developed  a  great  deal.  Others  estaB- 
lished  new  cults,  such  as  thosejrf  Fate  or  the  Emperor.  Still 
others  sought  to  make  philosophy  a  substitute  for  religion, 
and  philosophical  schools  of  a  decidedly  religious  nature,  such 
as  Stoicism,  became  popular.  But  one  of  the  most  important 
of  the  religious  developments  of  the  centuries  followmgrSIex- 
ander  was  the  introduction  of  rrew  religions  from  the  Orient. 
Even  in  the  fourth  century  this  process  began,  and  during 
the  next  seven  hundred  years  a  constant  stream  of  new  reli- 
gions  poured  into  the  western  world  from  Egypt,  Asia,  Minor, 
Syria,  Persia,  Babylonia  and  Palestine.  The  religious  life 
of  later  Greece  is  therefore  markeoTby  the  greatest  confusion, 
by  the  struggles  of  sects,  by  the  constant  search  for  something 
new,  for  a  religion  which  could  adequately  fill  the  needs  of 
the  new  age :  it  was  not  until  the  advent  of  Christianity  that 
such  a  religion  was  found.1 

In  the  various  foreign  religions  of  the  period,  asceticism 
was  prominent,  but  it  must  be  stated  at  the  outset  that  in  the 
distinctly  Greek  cults  and  religions,  there  was  little  that  was 

i  For  a  splendid  general  account  of  the  political,  economic  and  social 
developments  of  this  period,  and  particularly  for  their  repercussions 
upon  intellectual,  philosophical  and  religious  development,  see  Wend- 
land,  Die  hellenistisch-romische  Kultur  (3  ed.,  1912).  For  the  general 
religious  development,  see  also  Gruppe,  Griech.  mythol.-  u.  rel.-geschichte, 
II  §  3,  pp.  1458ff.  For  detailed  points,  the  modern  literature  in 
enormous;  reference  should  be  made  here  to  the  writings  of  Cumont, 
Beitzenstein,  Wendland,  Dieterich,  Bousset,  etc. 


69 

new.  OrphisgLfiontinued  to  teach  the  ascetic  life,  hut  it  had 
already  done  so  for  many  years,  and  it  is  quite  impossible  to 
say  how  much  was  added  that  was  new  ;  it  is  hardly  prohahle 
that  Orphism  remained  identically  the  same  during  the  one 
thousand  years  of  its  history,  hut  as  has  already  been  pointed 
out,  there  is  absolutely  no  material  which  would  enable  one 
to  trace  its  development  exactly.  It  is  probable,  however, 
that  the  general  point  of  view  of  the  Orphics  remained  the 
same  during  their  whole  history,  and  that  whatever  changes 
did  take  place  were  in  a  greater  or  less  emphasis  upon  certain 
details  :  as  we  are  without  materials  for  forming  an  accurate 
judgment,  an  a  priori  supposition  may  be  hazarded,  that  as 
time  went  on,  Asceticism  became  more  and  more  important 
in  the  Orphic  mysteries,  for,  as  will  appear  later,  asceticism 
was  very  much  more  "  in  the  air  "  during  the  later  period 
than  before,  and  the  Orphics  could  hardly  have  failed  to  be 
affected  by  this  Zeitgeist.  The  ascetic  features  of  one  of  the 
most  popular  cults  of  this  period,  the  Eleusian  mysteries,  have 
already  been  described  ;  as  in  the  Orphic  mysteries,  there  was 
no  fundamental  change  at  this  time,  but  it  is  probable  that 
under  the  influence  of  contemporary  thought  the  ascetic  fea- 
tures received  greater  emphasis  than  before.  In  the  new 
cults  which  were  mentioned,  such  as  the  Emperor  cult,  there 
TrrnjTD  plflnn  for  anrpjjf%m;  and  the  philosophical  schools, 
while  attempting  to  take  the  place  of  religion,  were  not  reli- 
gions, so  their  asceticism  was  not  strictly  religious  asceticism  ; 
it  was  an  ethical  or  philosophical  asceticism,  and  will  have  to 
receive  a  separate  treatment  in  the  following  chapters.  It  is 
thus  seen  that  the  strictly  Greek  side  of  the  religious  develop- 


ment of  theJEEellenistic  times  jidji^add^miich.  tq.the  ascetic 
fe^tuj^es_pi^religion.  This  is  probably  due  in  part  to  the  fact 
that  persons  of  an  ascetic  turn  of  mind  found  their  desires 
better  filled,  either  by  the  philosophical  schools,  or  by  the 
oriental  religions  ;  attention  must  now  be  directed  to  these. 
In  regard  to  the  oriental  religions,  a  word  of  introduction 


70 

is  necessary.  It  is  not  the  purpose  of  the  present  study  to 
give  a  complete  account  of  the  non-Christian  antecedents  of 
Christian  asceticism,  and  much  less  to  give  a  general  history 
of  asceticism;  if  this  were  its  purpose,  a  great  amount  of 
space  would  have  to  be  devoted  to  these  religions.  But  the 
present  paper  is  intended  merely  to  give  an  account  of  the 
Greek  antecedents  of  Christian  asceticism.  From  this  point 
of  view,  it  might  seem  as  though  there  were  no  occasion  for 
mentioning  oriental  asceticism  at  all;  this  is  just  as  wrong, 
however,  as  the  other  view,  for,  dating  from  the  days  of  the 
Roman  Empire  at  least,  the  devotees  of  these  religions  were 
to  be  found  in  all  parts  of  the  Roman  world,  and  their  influ- 
ence upon  Greeks  and  Romans  was  great.  In  the  following 
chapters  it  will  be  seen  how  important  this  influence  upon 
ethical  teachers  and  philosophers  was.  The  ethical  teachers 
showed  this  influence  by  directly  imitating  Oriental  ascetics, 
though  they  did  so  on  purely  ethical  grounds — they  did  not 
accept  any  religion  as  a  whole.  Philosophers  felt  its  effects 
chiefly  through  Gnosticism,  a  curious  blend  of  Oriental 
theology  and  Platonic  philosophy,  which  arose  somewhat 
before  the  advent  of  the  Christian  era,  and  which  had  a 
powerful  influence  upon  early  Christians  from  the  days  of 
Paul  on,  but  which  also  had  a  noticeable  effect  upon  Greeks 
such  as  Plotinus.  It  is  consequently  necessary  to  have  at 
least  a  general  view  of  the  nature  of  this  oriental  asceticism, 
if  the  later  Greek  development  is  to  be  understood.  The 
account  to  which  the  remainder  of  this  chapter  will  be  devoted 
seeks  to  supply  this  general  view,  though  it  does  not  in  any 
way  pretend  to  be  complete,  and  is  based  entirely  upon  the 
works  of  modern  specialists. 

Although  the  term  "  Oriental  religions  "  covers  a  multitude 
of  sects,  coming  from  many  lands,  from  Asia  Minor  to  Egypt 
or  Persia,  and  representing  all  stages  of  refinement,  from  the 
savage  rites  of  Cybele  to  the  highly  spiritualized  devotion  to 
Isis,  still  there  were  certain  things  which  they  had  in  com- 


71 

mon.  "  Two  new  things  in  particular  were  brought  by  the 
Oriental  priests :  mysterious  methods  of  purification,  by  which 
they  claimed  to  wash  away  the  impurities  of  the  soul,  and 
the  assurance  that  a  blessed  immortality  would  be  the  reward 
of  piety."2  Such  are  the  words  in  which  Cumont  sums  up 
his  researches  on  the  subject.  Now  it  has  already  been  shown 
that  both  of  these  things  had  been  offered  for  centuries  by  the 
Orphics,  so  one  may  ask  whether  the  adjective  "new"  is 
correctly  applied  to  them;  but  it  is  incontestable  that  the 
Oriental  religions  did  present  these  ideas  to  many  persons  for 
the  first  time — Orphism  had  always  been  confined  to  a  rela- 
tively small  number  of  persons — and  that  they  did  actually 
present  just  these  things.  Moreover,  they  agreed,  to  a  con- 
siderable extent,  in  the  methods  by  which  they  sought  to 
attain  this  purity:  they  " pretejodecLto  restore  lost  purity  to 
the  souljuther  through  the  performance  of  ritual  ^ceremonies 
or  through  mortifications  and  penance.  They  had  a  series  of 
ablutions  and  lustrations  supposed  to  restore  original  inno- 
cence to  the  mystic.  He  had  to  wash  himself  in  the  sacred 
water  according  to  certain  prescribed  forms.  .  .  .  The  votary, 
again,  might  drink  or  besprinkle  himself  with  the  blood  of  a 
slaughtered  victim  or  of  the  priests  themselves,  in  which  case 
the  prevailing  idea  was  that  the  liquid  circulating  in  the 
veins  was  a  vivifying  principle  capable  of  imparting  a  new 
existence.  These  and  similar  rites  were  supposed  to  regener- 
ate the  initiated  person  and  to  restore  him  to  an  immaculate 
and  incorruptible  life."3  But  this  purgation  of  the  soul 
was  not  effected  solely  through  such  liturgic  acts;  at  times, 
self-denial  and  suffering,  real  asceticism,  was  required. 
"  Abstinence,  which  prevented  the  introduction  of  deadly 
elements  into  the  system,  and  chastity,  which  preserved  men 
from  pollution  and  debility,  became  means  of  getting  rid  of 
the  domination  of  evil  powers  and  of  regaining  heavenly 

2  Cumont,  Oriental  Beligions  in  the  Boman  Empire  (1907),  p.  39. 
s  Ibid.,  pp.  39f . 


72 

favor.  Macerations,  laborious  pilgrimages,  public  confes- 
sions, sometimes  flagellations  and  mutilations,  in  fact,  all 
forms  of  penance  and  mortifications  uplifted  the  fallen  man 
and  brought  him  nearer  the  gods.  .  .  .  This  shows  the  intro- 
duction into  Europe  of  Oriental  asceticism."4  Asceticism 
was  therefore  one  of  the  prominent  features  of  these  new 
religions,  and  undoubtedly  contributed  not  a  little  to  their 
spread,  while  on  the  other  hand,  their  spread  contributed  not 
a  little  to  the  development  of  ascetic  ideals  in  the  Roman 
world ;  the  two  advanced  simultaneously  as  things  went  from 
bad  to  worse  in  the  Roman  Empire.  "  We  note  the  spread 
of  that  feeling  of  exhaustion  and  debility  which  follows  the 
aberrations  of  passion,  and  the  same  weakness  that  led  to 
crime  impelled  men  to  seek  absolution  in  the  formal  practices 
of  asceticism."5  But  without  dwelling  further  upon  a  dis- 
cussion of  the  causes  of  this  ascetic  movement,  let  us  attempt 
to  describe  more  carefully  the  asceticism  taught  by  specific 
religions. 

As  these  Oriental  religions  were  all  independent  of  one 
another,  there  is  no  logical  order  for  studying  them,  and  a 
geographical  order  will  be  as  good  as  any.  Then  the  first 
cult  to  be  studied  will  be  that  of  Cybele.  This  cult  has  been 
traced  back  to  the  Cretans,  fifteen  centuries  before  our  era, 
whence  it  passed,  at  an  early  date,  to  Asia  Minor,  where  it 
found  its  real  home  in  the  Anatolian  highlands  of  Phrygia. 
The  Greek  goddess  Rhea  was  probably  descended  from  the 
same  Minoan  ancestor,  but  by  the  end  of  the  fifth  century, 
Cybele  began  to  appear  in  Greece  herself,  under  the  name 
of  Mother  of  the  Gods.6  The  cult  of  the  goddess  was 
formally  introduced  into  Rome  in  the  year  204  B.C.  From 
that  time  on,  this  religion  was  among  the  most  popular  in 
the  city,  until  the  second  and  third  centuries  A.D.,  when  it 

*  Hid.,  p.  40f . 

5  Ibid.,  p.  42. 

e  Graillot,  Le  Culte  de  Cybele,  Mere  des  Dieux  (1912),  pp.  1-24. 


73 

reached  its  greatest  importance,  and  was  even  accepted  by 
emperors.7  The  principal  rite  of  the  religion  was  the  tauro- 
bolium,  or  sacrifice  of  a  bull,  for  the  safety  of  a  beneficiary ; 
sometimes  it  was  for  the  safety  of  the  Emperor,  the  Empire 
or  a  city,  and  sometimes  for  that  of  an  individual  person.8 
The  ascetic  features  of  the  cult  are  illustrated  in  the  institu- 
tion of  sacred  eunuchs,  or  Galli,  who  were  in  the  service  of 
the  goddess.  The  barbarous  rite  of  emasculation  here  em- 
ployed was  probably  of  Semitic  origin  and  always  remained 
abhorrent  to  the  greater  part  of  the  Occidentals,  but  the 
empire  could  not  prevent  its  spread.  "  The  Galli  were 
mystics  who  had  received  the  major  initiation.  They  had 
reached  the  highest  step  of  the  mystic  ladder.  Emasculation 
is  here  the  supreme  consecration,  a  veritable  sacrament.  .  .  . 
Properly  speaking,  it  is  a  votive  offering,  resting  upon  the 
original  notion  of  substitution  and  ransom.  At  the  begin- 
ning, they  sacrificed  some  of  the  most  beautiful  adolescents 
of  the  tribe.  Later,  a  partial  sacrifice,  the  ablation  and  obla- 
tion of  the  virile  organs,  might  take  the  place  of  the  complete 
sacrifice  of  life.7'9  The  men  who  had  offered  this  sacrifice 
held  a  privileged  place  in  the  religion :  they  wore  special  in- 
signia, they  performed  divination,  cured  cattle,  prophesied 
and  became  magicians ;  sometimes  they  developed  orgiastic 
cults  of  their  own,  marked  by  wild  dances  terminating  in 
delirium,  by  flagellation  and  maceration,  the  sacrifice  of  their 
own  blood,  and  by  mutilations.10  Their  whole  life  was  sepa- 
rated from  that  of  profane  persons.  "  Their  religious  life  is 
incompatible  with  lay  existence.  For  them,  the  service  of 
their  lady  is  exclusive ;  it  keeps  them  about  the  temples  and 
holy  images."11  They  lived  upon  charity.  They  were  sub- 
jected to  a  common  rule  which  imposed  mendicancy  upon 

i  Ibid.,  pp.  182, 224. 

8  Ibid.,  ch.  iv. 

9  Ibid.,  p.  293. 

10  Ibid.,  pp.  SOlff. 
a  Ibid.,  p.  301. 


74 

them,  which  led  Tertullian  to  speak  of  it  as  a  "  Religion  of 
beggars."  This  demanding  alms  was  one  of  their  forms  of 
asceticism.12  The  Galli  resembled  a  mendicant  and  begging 
order.13  By  this  mode  of  life,  they  won  the  admiration  of 
multitudes.  "  Their  ardent  faith,  their  ascetic  life,  their 
austere  disciplines  were  an  effective  and  contagious  discipline. 
Many  a  troubled  soul  was  borne  towards  these  interpreters  of 
a  divine  word,  who  appeared  superior  to  other  men  because 
they  were  no  longer  men,  who  heard  confessions  and  directed 
consciences,  forgave  sins,  and  gave  consolations  and  sublime 
hopes.  "14  Others  did  not  attain  the  lofty  place  held  by 
these  Galli,  but  led  an  ascetic  life  nevertheless.  Some  who 
had  merely  undergone  a  simple  initiation  organized  them- 
selves into  communities  called  the  "Religious  of  the  Great 
Mother,"  and  led  a  life  of  greater  strictness  than  that  of  other 
people,  supported  wandering  Galli,  let  their  hair  grow  long, 
wore  special  costumes  ;  but  they  were  not  pagan  monks  in  the 
full  sense  of  the  term,  for  they  did  not  cut  themselves  off 
from  the  world  altogether  —  they  married  and  became  fathers 
of  families.15 

The  companion  of  Cybele  was  Attis.  Though  apparently 
of  an  independent  origin,  he  was,  in  historical  times,  always 
associated  with  her  as  her  lover.  In  fact,  the  self-mutilation 
which  the  Galli  performed  was  explained  as  being  in  imita- 
tion of  Attis's  emasculating  himself  during  frenzy.  But 
there  were  certain  features  of  the  Phrygian  religion  which 
were  an  Attis  cult,  and  which  merit  special  attention  as  they 
contained  exceptional  ascetic  elements.  According  to  the 
myth,  Attis  died  as  a  result  of  his  self-mutilation,  and  his 
death  was  bitterly  mourned  by  Cybele.  In  memory  of  this 
event,  the  worshippers  mourned  also,  every  spring.  During 
three  days  they  spent  their  time  in  lamenting  the  death  of  the 

12  Ibid.,  p.  312. 
is  Ibid. 


is  Ibid.,  p.  284. 


75 

god.  But  in  the  night  of  the  last  day,  their  sorrow  was 
turned  to  joy,  for  the  priest  announced  that  Attis  had  risen. 
This  was  hailed  as  a  promise  that  they  too  would  ultimately 
issue  triumphant  from  the  corruption  of  the  grave.16  Dur- 
ing the  days  of  mourning,  however,  the  worshippers  had  given 
themselves  over  to  a  stringent  asceticism — perhaps  in  prep- 
aration for  the  coming  sacrament  as  much  as  in  a  sign  of 
sorrow — which  was  a  performance  much  like  the  day  of 
Fasting  in  the  Greek  Thesmophoria.  They  abstained  from 
sexual  intercourse  and  from  certain  forbidden  foods,  par- 
ticularly bread.17 

This  Easter  rejoicing  preceded  by  three  days  of  ascetic 
mourning  is  also  found  in  the  cult  of  Adonis,  in  Syria.     In     ^Q^.     . 
fact,  the  resemblance  of  the  two  cults  is  so  great  that  some  n) 

have  inferred  a  common  origin.  According  to  the  myth, 
Adonis  was  slain  by  a  boar,  while  hunting,  and  was  bitterly 
mourned  for  by  Aphrodite  (i.  e.,  Astarte ;  Adonis  is  a  Greek 
form  of  Adon,  "lord,"  his  Syrian  name  being  Tammuz.) 
This  mourning  was  imitated  each  spring  by  his  worshippers, 
particularly  at  Byblos,  but  also  elsewhere  (including  Jeru- 
salem, Ezek.  8,  14),  and, -sen  the  third  day,  just  as  in  the 
Attis  cult,  they  rejoiced  for  the  risen  Adonis.18  Here  again, 
therefore,  we  find  the  doctrine  that  sorrow  expressed  merely 
by  weeping,  or  else  accompanied  by  ascetic  acts,  is  an  effective 
purification,  and  a  fitting  preparation  for  sacred  things.  The 
Syrians  also  had  a  sacred  fish,  which  could  not  be  eaten ;  we 
read  of  a  man  who  had  offended  the  goddess  by  eating  this 
fish :  "  dressed  in  sordid  rags,  he  covered  himself  with  a  sack 
and  sat  in  the  public  highway  humbly  to  proclaim  his  mis- 
deed in  order  to  obtain  forgiveness."19  We  also  read  that 
the  Syrian  goddess,  too,  had  her  Galli.20 

16  Frazer,  Adonis,  Attis,  Osiris,  I,  p.  272. 

17  Hepding,  Attis,  seine  Mythen  und  sein  Kult   (1904),  pp.  155,  182. 
is  Frazer,  Op.  cit.,  I,  ch.  i  and  ix. 

is  Cumont,  Oriental  Religions,  p.  40. 
20  Ibid.,  p.  222,  n.  31. 


76 


Farther  to  the  east  was  Persia,  the  home  of  the  religion  of 
Mithra.  As  far  back  as  the  religion  of  this  people  has  been 
traced,  it  has  been  found  that  they  worshipped  a  divinity  of 
light,  named  Mithra,  who  soon  began  to  receive  special  atten- 
tion. Regarded  as  a  god  of  light  or  fire,  sometimes  identified 
with  the  sun,  and  also  regarded  as  a  war  god  and  the  giver 
of  victory,  Mithra  received  great  attention  during  the  period 
of  the  Persian  Empire,  and  had  a  large  place  in  the  official 
cult.  Finally,  during  the  period  of  moral  and  religious 
fermentation  provoked  by  the  Macedonian  conquest,  Mithra- 
ism  received  its  final  form — the  form  under  which  it  sub- 
sequently spread  over  the  Roman  Empire.21  The  religion  of 
Mithra  was  not  well  received  in  Greece,  but  in  Rome  it  was 
for  a  long  time  one  of  the  principal  religions.  It  was  appar- 
ently introduced  into  Italy  during  the  first  century  B.C.,  but 
dating  from  the  end  of  the  first  century  A.D.  began  its  real 
prominence.  It  was  always  a  religion  particularly  popular 
with  the  army,  and  the  chief  centers  of  its  cult  were  the 
camps  guarding  the  frontiers  of  the  empire.  The  religion 
was  dualistic  in  its  character,  dividing  all  things  into  two 
classes,  the  good  ones  being  under  the  charge  of  the  superior 
gods  of  light,  and  the  bad  ones  given  over  to  the  powers  of 
darkness.  A  mighty  conflict  between  good  and  evil  was  sup- 
posed to  be  engaged  in  upon  earth,  and  this  universal  conflict 
gave  the  key  to  the  moral  system  taught  by  the  religion. 
"  Life  is  a  proving,  and  to  leave  it  victoriously,  one  had  to 
observe  the  law  which  the  god  himself  had  delivered  to  the 
ancient  Magi.'722  Incertitude  as  to  the  exact  nature  of  this 
law  is  extreme,  but  it  appears  that  "  perfect  purity  remained 
for  them  the  end  towards  which  the  existence  of  the  faithful 
should  tend.  Their  ritual  included  repeated  lustrations  and 
ablutions,  which  were  believed  to  wash  away  the  stains  of  the 

21  Cumont,    Textes   et    Monuments   -figures   relatifs   aux   mysteres   de 
MitJira  (1896ff.),  I,  pp.  223ff. 

22  iud.t  I,  p.  307. 


77 

soul.  This  purification  conformed  to  Mazdean  traditions,  as 
well  as  being  in  harmony  with  the  general  tendencies  of  the 
epoch.  Ceding  to  these  tendencies,  the  Mithraists  even 
carried  their  principles  to  excesses,  so  that  their  ideal  of  per- 
fection inclined  towards  asceticism.  They  praised  absti- 
nence from  certain  foods  and  absolute  continence."23  The 
cult  had  a  clergy  upon  whom  ascetic  rules  were  imposed. 
Tertullian  says  that  the  supreme  pontiff  might  marry  only 
once,  and  that,  like  the  Christians,  the  worshippers  of  this 
god  had  their  "virgins"  and  "continents."24  "The  exist- 
ence of  this  sort  of  Mithraic  monasticism  is  the  more  remark- 
able," says  Cumont,  "  because  this  value  attached  to  celibacy 
is  contrary  to  the  spirit  of  Zoroastrianism."26  It  serves  to 
illustrate,  however,  how  great  the  tendencies  in  this  direction 
were. 

The  other  great  religion  which  spread  through  the  Koman 
Empire  was  the  Egyptian  cult  of  Isis.  This  goddess  was  the 
chief  divinity  of  Egypt  in  the  last  epoch  of  its  religious  de- 
velopment. As  was  pointed  out  above,26  some  scholars  are 
of  the  opinion  that  the  cult  of  Isis  exercised  considerable 
influence  upon  the  Greek  religion  in  the  earliest  stages  of  its 
development;  it  is  certain  that  by  the  time  of  Herodotus, 
the  Greeks  themselves  believed  that  they  saw  affinities  between 
the  two  religions.  But  later  the  Egyptian  cult  itself  was 
introduced:  it  had  long  been  known  in  the  Aegean  archi- 
peligo,  but  by  350  B.C.  an  altar  had  been  erected  to  Isis  at 
_Eir.aejLis_;  later  the  cult  appeared  in'otEeFparts  of  Greece,  ImcT 
in  the  %st_century_B.c.,  it  was,  introduced_mto  Rome;  dur- 
ing more  than  five  centuries  it  was  tended  in  the  Latin 
world.27  In  the  worship  of  Isis,  asceticism  always  had  a 

23  Ibid.,  p.  307. 
2*  Ibid.,  p.  324. 
as  Ibid. 

26  Supra,  p.  27.  , 

2?  Reseller,  Lex.  d.  griech.  u.  rom.  myth.,  art.  "Isis";  Cumont,  Or. 
Eel.,  pp.  78-85. 


78 

prominent  place.  The  myth  related  that  at  one  time  her  son 
Osiris  was  killed,  and  his  body  cut  up  and  thrown  into  the 
Nile ;  for  a  long  time  she  sought  him,  sorrowing,  until  at  last 
she  found  him  and  brought  him  to  life  again.  In  memory 
of  this  event,  her  worshippers  lamented  also  for  a  while  over 
the  slain  Osiris,  but  as  in  the  other  religions,  their  sorrow 
was  followed  by  rejoicing  upon  the  resurrection  of  the  god.28 
The  period  of  mourning  was  marked  by  fasts  and  other 
ascetic  rites.  It  has  sometimes  been  urged  that  a  special 
asceticism  was  demanded  of  the  priests  of  Isis.  A  fragment 
of  the  Stoic  Chaeremon  has  preserved  a  description  of  these 
priests,  with  their  ascetic  life,  their  slow  march,  their  down- 
cast eyes,  etc.  ;29  but  it  has  recently  been  strongly  urged  that 
this  description  is  a  great  exaggeration.  The  most  recent 
writer  on  the  subject  maintains  that  there  was  no  asceticism 
among  the  Egyptian  priests.  But  whether  Chaeremon  exag- 
gerated or  not,  it  is  certain  that  Otto30  is  wrong  when  he 
denies  that  there  were  any  ascetics  at  all.  It  is  certain  that 
at  least  in  the  second  century  before  our  era,  there  were  in- 
dividuals who  had  given  themselves  over  to  an  ascetic  life  in 
honor  of  Isis  or  Serapis.  In  the  papyri  coming  from  the 
great  Serapeum  at  Memphis  there  is  frequent  mention  of 
individuals  called  /eaTo^ot,  who  were  recluses  in  the  temple 
and  devoted  to  the  service  of  the  goddess.  It  is  true  that 
Preuschen  and  others  maintain  that  this  word  means  "pos- 
sessed," and  signifies  that  these  individuals  were  "  possessed  " 
by  the  goddess  or  inspired,31  but  the  best  modern  scholars 
agree  that  it  really  means  "bound"  and  signifies  that  they 
were  recluses,  prisoners  of  the  goddess.32  Over  sixty  years 

28  Frazer,  Op.  cit.,  II,  ch.  i,  and  pp.  49-51,  84-86. 

29  Apud  Porph.  de  Abst.  IV  6. 

so  Otto,  Priester  und  Tempel  im  hellenistischen  Agypten   (1905),  II, 
p.  167. 

31  Preuschen,  Monchtum  und  Serapiskult   (1899). 

32  Bouch£-Leclercq,  in  Melanges  Perrot,  p.  17ff . ;  Beitzenstein,  Hellen- 
istische  Mysterienreligionen,  p.  74. 


79 

ago  Brunet  de  Presle,  in  a  paper  read  before  the  French 
Institute,  suggested  a  connection  between  these  recluses  and 
the  early  monks;33  several  years  later,  Weingarten  seriously 
attempted  to  explain  the  whole  rise  of  Christian  monasticism 
from  them,  alleging  that  Pachomius,  the  legislator  of  Chris- 
tian monasticism,  had  been  such  a  recluse  in  his  youth;34  this 
is  obviously  too  simple  a  theory,  and  is  not  held  by  any 
serious  scholars  today,  but  the  very  posing  of  the  question 
directed  considerable  attention  to  these  men,  and  their  ascetic 
character  has  been  made  very  evident.  "We  may  also  con- 
sider as  established  that  the  tcdTo%oi  of  Serapis  and  Isis  are 
novices  who  serve  for  years  or  even  a  life  time  in  the  temple 
in  the  hope  of  consecration,"  and  that  there  was  a  theory 
that  "  this  neglect  of  the  body  was  especially  pleasing  to  God, 
and  a  hope  of  being  considered  worthy  of  extraordinary 
dreams  and  visions  while  in  such  a  state."35  As  time  went 
on,  asceticism  became  ever  more  common  in  Egypt:  in  the 
second  and  third  centuries,  the  land  was  filled  with  anchorites 
and  wandering  ascetics,  who  not  only  made  it  a  point  to  ab- 
stain from  flesh,  wine  and  sexual  intercourse,  but  who  also 
inflicted  upon  themselves  all  sorts  of  severe  mortifications.36 
Egypt  became  preeminently  the  land  of  extravagant  ascetics, 
so  that  the  eccentric  Christians  had  but  little  to  add  to  what 
these  Egyptians  had  already  done. 

As  was  said  at  the  outset,  all  of  this  had  the  greatest  influ- 
ence upon  later  Christian  development,  but  for  the  Greeks, 
its  effect  was  felt  chiefly  through  the  intermediacy  of  that 
curious  philosophy  known  as  Gnosticism,  which  grew  up  out 
of  a  combination  of  the  theological  tenets  of  these  various 

ss  Memoire  sur  le  S£rapeum  de  Memphis,  in  M6moires  Presentes  par 
diverses  savants  d  I' Academic  des  Inscriptions  et  Belles-Lettres  II 
(1852). 

3*Der  Ursprung  des  Monchtums  in  nachconstantinischen  Zeitalter 
(1877). 

35  Reitzenstein,  Mysteritnrel.,  pp.  89ff. 

ss  Reitzenstein,  W under erzahlung en,  pp.  65ff.,  142ff.j  etc. 


80 

sects  with  Platonic  philosophy.  A  few  words  must  there- 
fore be  devoted  to  a  description  of  some  of  the  features  of 
this  system. 

The  term  Gnosticism  is  applied  to  a  somewhat  hetero- 
geneous group  of  systems  of  belief  which  were  prevalent 
during  the  first  three  centuries  of  our  era,  and  which  con- 
cerned themselves  with  a  yvwo'i'S,  or  higher  knowledge,  which 
amounted  to  a  revelation  for  the  direction  of  life.  Though  it 
was  the  result  of  the  general  syncretism  of  the  period,  the 
sources  of  the  different  Gnostic  systems  varied:  thus  some 
Gnostics  showed  closer  affinities  with  Egyptian,  others  with 
Babylonian,  and  others  with  Persian  thought,  but  all  in- 
cluded within  their  systems  elements  coming  from  all  of 
these  sources,  as  well  as  from  Greek  philosphy.37  This  type 
of  thought  had  the  greatest  influence  upon  the  speculations 
of  the  early  Christians:  in  the  second  century  there  was  an 
extremely  close  connection  between  the  two,  but  these  rela- 
tions go  back  to  the  apostle  Paul  himself,  who  was  pro- 
foundly influenced  by  Gnostic  speculation.38  But  it  is  clear 
that  Gnosticism  was  independent  of  Christianity  and  even 
preceded  it.39 

The  central  ideas  common  to  all  the  systems  of  Gnostic 
speculation  were  those  of  a  radical  dualism  in  the  world,  and 
of  the  ascent  of  the  soul  to  the  higher  element.  This  dualism 
contained  both  the  Persian  antithesis  of  good  and  bad,  of 
light  and  darkness,  and  the  Platonic  antithesis  of  soul  and 
body.  Into  the  details  of  the  myths  by  which  the  origin 
of  this  dualism  was  explained,  it  is  not  necessary  to  go:  it 
will  be  sufficient  to  say  that  they  were  a  most  curious  and 

37  Of.  Scott,  in  Encyc.  Eel.  and  Ethics,  art.  ' l  Gnosticism, ' '  p.  234. 

38  See  particularly,  Keitzenstein,  MysterienreL;  p.  56:  "Die  religions- 
geschichtliche  Betrachtung  darf  ihn  stellen  nicht  als  den  ersten,  aber  als 
den  grossesten  Gnostiker."    P.  59:  "Die  hellenistische  religiose  Litera- 
tur  muss  er  gelesen  haben;  ihre  Sprache  redet  er,  ihre  Gedanken  hat  er 
Bich  hineinversetzt. " 

39  Friedlander,  Der  vorchristl.  jud.  Gnosticismus  (1898). 


81 

confused  medley  of  myths  from  all  sorts  of  sources  and  repre- 
senting all  stages  of  refinement.  In  the  universe  which  this 
dualism  thus  divided  into  hostile  camps,  man  held  an  inter- 
mediate position:  he  was  evil,  he  was  material,  but  he  also 
had  a  soul,  though  a  fallen  one,  and  by  this  he  was  attached 
to  the  superior  world.40  Now  the  central  idea  of  Gnosticism 
was  redemption:  the  Gnosis  was  offered  to  the  elect  as  a 
means  whereby  the  soul  might  free  itself  from  the  body  and 
its  bondage.  As  all  of  the  evil  and  misery  of  the  world  were 
blamed  upon  the  mixture  of  the  two  antagonistic  principles, 
redemption  from  them  consisted  in  deliverance  from  the  in- 
trinsically evil  material  world.  It  is  obvious  that  such  a 
theory  could  only  lead  to  a  stringent  asceticism  as  the  basis 
of  ethical  teaching,  and  as  a  matter  of  fact,  a  study  of  the 
great  Gnostics  shows  that  they  did  teach  just  such  an 
asceticism. 

The  great  Gnostics,  Basilides,  Valentinus  and  Marcion,  were 
Christians  as  well,  but  this  did  not  prevent  their  being  per- 
fectly good  Gnostics,  and  it  is  certain  that  their  asceticism 
was  not  of  Christian  origin,  for  in  their  day  Christianity  had 
developed  very  little  asceticism ;  it  was  rather  they  who  first 
introduced  it  into  Christianity  on  a  large  scale.  A  study  of 
their  asceticism  will  therefore  show  the  typically  Gnostic 
theories  on  the  subject. 

For  Basilides,  marriage  was  at  best  a  concession  to  men, 
and  he  strongly  advised  abstention  from  it;  though  he  re- 
garded the  sexual  appetite  as  natural,  he  said  that  it  was  by 
no  means  imperative,  and  held  that  it  was  better  not  to  gratify 
it.41  He  also  taught  the  purifying  virtues  of  suffering — an 
idea  which  is  at  the  basis  of  all  highly  developed  asceticism, 
and  which  has  already  been  met  with.  "  Tribulations  and 
sufferings  expiate,  purify  and  correct,"  he  taught.  "  They 

40  For  Gnostic  dualism,  see  Bousset,  Hauptprobleme  der  Gnosis  (1907), 
pp.  91ff. 

41  deFaye,  Gnostiques  et  Gnosticisme  (1913) ,  p.  27;  cf.  Bousset,  p.  95. 


82 

constitute  the  punishment  which  saves,  the  fcoXaarripiov,  and 
are  consequently  a  good  thing.  Basilides  says  so  expressly. 
He  declares  that  they  are  the  result  of  the  goodness  of  '  him 
who  leads  all  things.'  The  martyr  is  a  privileged  person. 
The  expiation  which  he  undergoes  is  more  glorious  than  that 
which  falls  to  ordinary  believers.'742  Like  him,  his  son 
Isidore  also  taught  a  most  rigorous  asceticism.  For  both, 
asceticism  was  a  way  of  redemption,  and  it  was  to  it  that  they 
gave  their  entire  attention.43 

Valentinus  was  preoccupied  with  much  the  same  question 
and  gave  a  similar  answer.  His  fundamental  theories  of  the 
distinction  of  soul  and  body,  and  that  the  body  is  the  source 
of  all  evil  and  the  enemy  to  be  routed,  naturally  led  to 
asceticism;  in  fact,  he  made  this  an  essential  part  of  what 
amounts  to  a  veritable  doctrine  of  sin  and  redemption. 
"With  these  views,  Valentinus  could  not  fail  to  become  an 
ascetic  in  morals.  In  the  final  analysis,  redemption,  for  him, 
consisted  in  the  elimination  of  the  corporal  element,  in  the 
mortification  of  the  flesh,  in  a  sort  of  inward  death.  To 
realize  this  ideal  was  the  privilege  of  spiritual  men."44 

Marcion,  too,  was  an  ascetic,  and  even  went  so  far  in  this 
regard  that  some  accused  him  of  being  a  Cynic.  He  con- 
demned the  flesh  and  forbade  marriage.  If  married,  his  dis- 
ciples had  to  renounce  all  sexual  relations.  "  Tertullian  con- 
stantly finds  fault  with  him  on  this  account.  '  Caro  in  nuptio 
tollitur/  he  said.  'Why  does  he  impose  chastity  upon  this 
infirm  and  unworthy  flesh,  whether  this  is  to  be  considered  a 
burden  or  a  glory  ? '  "45  Marcion  even  made  continence  a 
condition  of  baptism.  "  Marcion  does  not  baptise  flesh  unless 
it  is  virgin  or  widow  or  celibate,  or  unless  it  has  bought  bap- 
tism by  a  divorce.  This  institution  is  born  of  the  condemna- 
tion of  marriage."46  He  even  carried  his  asceticism  into  his 

42  de  Faye,  p.  30;  references  to  fr.  in  -Clem.  Al.  Strom.  IV  12,  83. 
«  de  Faye,  pp.  27,  34. 

44  de  Faye,  p.  42 ;  Clem.  Al.  Strom.  IV  13,  89. 

45  de  Faye,  p.  147 ;  Tertullian,  adv.  Marc.  I  28. 

46  Ter.  adv.  Marc.  I  29. 


83 

theory  of  the  world,  and  became  a  complete  pessimist.  "  It 
may  be  asked  whether  it  was  his  doctrine  of  God  which,  as  a 
logical  consequence,  made  Marcion  an  ascetic,  or  whether  it 
was  his  asceticism,  which  was  older  than  his  theological  ideas, 
which  found  a  plausible  excuse  in  these.  It  seems  probable 
that  Marcion,  like  all  the  fervent  souls  of  his  time,  philoso- 
phers as  well  as  Christians,  early  felt  strong  ascetic  tenden- 
cies. When  he  had  once  established  his  great  principle  of 
the  opposition  between  the  supreme  God  and  the  creator,  he 
saw  in  it  the  most  solid  foundation  for  virtue  as  he  under- 
stood it.  His  doctrine  of  God  strengthened  his  asceticism, 
and  gave  it  a  more  precise  form."47 

Such  were  the  ascetic  tendencies  of  the  oriental  religions 
which  entered  the  Roman  Empire  during  the  first  centuries 
of  our  era.  In  the  following  chapters  it  will  be  shown  what 
effect  these  had  upon  subsequent  Greek  speculation. 

47  de  Faye,  pp.  147-8;  Bousset,  p.  111. 


CHAPTEE  V 
ETHICAL  ASCETICISM 

The  new  elements  of  the  Greek  religion  which  appeared 
during  the  centuries  following  Alexander  were  not,  therefore, 
of  indigenous  origin,  but  were  importations  from  the  Orient. 
As  much  may  be  said  for  the  ascetic  tendencies  of  the  age 
which  were  strictly  religious :  they  were  of  eastern  origin  and 
were  introduced  into  the  Occident  along  with  the  religions  of 
which  they  formed  a  part.  If  it  were  not  for  the  fact  that 
these  oriental  religions  and  this  oriental  asceticism  affected 
Greek  speculation  on  the  subject  to  a  remarkable  extent,  there 
would  be  no  occasion  for  mentioning  the  religious  asceticism 
of  the  period  at  all  here.  But  it  is  undeniable  that  such  an 
influence  was  actually  exercised,  so  a  brief  account  of  the 
oriental  asceticism  and  its  theory  was  essential  to  an  under- 
standing of  the  later  Greek  asceticism. 

But  though  the  Greek  religion,  properly  so  called,  did  not 
develop  greatly  during  the  period  of  the  Hellenistic  and  Ro- 
man Empires,  the  Greek  mind  had  not  lost  its  originality  nor 
had  it  ceased  to  speculate.  The  only  difference  was  that  this 
speculation  began  to  flow  in  other  channels.  As  has  been 
pointed  out  above,  the  old  official  religions  had  become  unten- 
able for  a  large  part  of  the  people,  and  new  means  had  there- 
fore to  be  found  for  satisfying  their  religious  needs.  One 
means  that  was  tried,  the  introduction  of  new  cults,  has  been 
described ;  another  equally  important  one  was  found  in  what 
were  known  as  philosophical  schools. 

A  movement  towards  the  establishment  of  such  schools 
arose  among  the  immediate  disciples  of  Socrates,  who  divided 
themselves  up  into  groups,  Cyrenaics,  Megareans,  Cynics,  etc. 
As  time  went  on,  these  sects  and  their  successors  received 

84 


85 

an  ever-increasing  attention,  until  in  the  early  years  of  the 
Roman  Empire,  when  they  reached  their  fullest  development, 
the  majority  of  the  upper  class  people  had  attached  themselves 
to  one  school  or  another.  These  schools,  therefore,  filled  a  dis- 
tinctly religious  need,  and  their  teaching  took  an  increasingly 
religious  aspect ;  they  cannot  be  called  religions,  however,  for 
they  lacked  one  thing  that  is  essential  to  every  religion,  namely, 
a  cult.  But  if  these  schools  were  not  religions,  neither  was 
their  teaching  philosophy  in  the  strictest  sense  of  the  term. 
Though  it  is  unquestionably  true  that  many  of  these  schools, 
and  particularly  the  Stoics,  did  produce  philosophers  of  note, 
still  the  name  philosopher  cannot  be  applied  to  every  one  who 
was  a  member  of  one  of  these  schools.  Philosophy,  as  now 
understood,  is  a  discipline  to  which  but  few  have  either  the 
leisure  or  the  ability  to  devote  themselves,  and  which  includes 
the  formulation  of  a  reasoned  view  of  life  and  the  universe. 
These  schools,  and  especially  the  more  popular  ones,  did  not 
do  this:  they  appealed  to  a  wider  class  of  people  than  could 
interest  themselves  in  such  problems,  and  what  they  gave 
these  people  was  a  set  of  maxims  for  the  conduct  of  life. 
Some  may  have  developed  upon  these  maxims  and  thus  formu- 
lated a  real  philosophy  (as  was  the  case  with  Seneca,  for  ex- 
ample, whose  writings  will  be  examined  in  the  next  chapter) , 
but  the  vast  majority  of  the  adherents  to  the  schools  did  not: 
they  contented  themselves  with  regulating  their  lives  accord- 
ing to  the  precepts  of  their  school,  so  the  schools  may  be  called 
ethical  schools  and  their  thought  ethical  thought ;  their  asceti- 
cism was  ethical  asceticism. 

These  ethical  schools  were  numerous,  each  catering  to  a  dif- 
ferent sort  of  people,  and  each  supplying  a  different  sort  of 
ethical  system.  The  one  which  best  illustrates  the  ascetic 
tendencies  of  the  day  is  that  of  the  Cynics. 

Cynicism  claimed  to  go  back  to  the  Socratic  teaching;  it 
claimed  as  its  founder  Antisthenes,  who  is  described  in  Xeno- 
phon's  Memorabilia  and  Symposium.  But  its  real  founder 


86 

was  Diogenes  of  Sinope,  who  flourished  in  the  middle  of  the 
fourth  century.  After  him  came  Crates  and  various  lesser 
disciples,  but  after  about  the  middle  of  the  third  century  we 
lose  track  of  the  school.  But  in  the  first  century  B.C.  it  re- 
emerged,  and  from  then  until  the  time  of  St.  Augustine  it 
remained  one  of  the  most  prominent  of  the  ethical  schools. 

Cynicism  has  been  spoken  of  as  athe  philosophy  of  the 
Greek  proletariat."1  Though  there  were  brilliant  exceptions, 
such  as  Hipparchia,  the  majority  of  the  followers  of  this 
school  were  of  plebeian  origin.  They  made  it  their  mission  in 
life  to  carry  on  an  uncompromising  warfare  against  all  the 
institutions  of  their  day,  political,  religious  and  other,  and 
the  method  they  chose  for  doing  this  was  to  ridicule  and 
abuse.  The  Diatribe,  an  abusive,  scurrilous  and  sometimes 
vulgar,  but  always  witty  harangue,  became  their  favorite  form 
of  discourse :  they  so  popularized  it  that  it  became  the  stand- 
ard form  for  all  agitators  with  a  message,  and  traces  of  it  are 
clearly  observable  in  the  epistles  of  St.  Paul  and  St.  James.2 
They  foreswore  all  the  comforts  of  civilization  themselves, 
and  wandered  about  from  place  to  place,  delivering  their  dia- 
tribes, and  living  as  best  they  could;  they  have  frequently 
been  compared  to  the  begging  friars  of  later  ages.3 

The  cardinal  point  in  the  Cynics'  teaching  was  the  supreme 
value  of  virtue,  and  the  utter  insignificance  of  everything 
else:  if  other  things  were  not  positively  bad,  they  were  at 
least  indifferent  and  unworthy  of  a  man's  efforts.  Wisdom 
itself  they  classified  among  indifferent  things.  They  allowed 
of  no  distinctions  between  men  except  on  the  basis  of  virtue 
alone:  rich  and  poor,  freeman  and  slave,  wise  and  foolish, 
Greek  and  barbarian  were  all  alike  to  them,  except  in  so  far 
as  one  excelled  another  in  virtue.  Moreover,  they  saw  in 
civilization  the  chief  enemy  of  virtue.  According  to  their 

iGomperz,  Greek  Thinkers,  II,  p.  148  (Eng.  tr.). 

2  Wendland,  Philo  und  die  Tcynisch-stoische  Diatribe  (1895);  Die  ur- 
christliche  Literaturformen  (1912)  ;  R.  Bultman,  Der  Stil  der  paulin- 
ischen  Predigt  und  die  IcyniscJi-stoiscJie  Diatribe  (1910). 

sBernays,  Lucian  und  die  Kyniker  (1879),  p.  99. 


87 

doctrine,  the  philosopher  should  show  himself  absolutely  in- 
dependent of  civilization  and  society,  and  even  of  other  per- 
sons, and  devote  himself  entirely  to  the  pursuit  of  virtue. 
Hence  came  the  eccentricities  and  bizzareries  for  which  the 
founders  of  the  school  are  famous :  we  all  know  of  the  numer- 
ous legends  of  which  Diogenes  is  the  hero,  of  his  life  in  a 
barrel,  of  his  scanty  clothes,  his  attempts  to  do  without  fire 
by  eating  his  meat  raw,  of  his  disregard  for  social  conventions 
and  usages  which  resulted  in  the  completest  shamelessness ; 
these  were  all  means  by  which  he  sought  to  express  his  entire 
self-sufficiency  and  to  lead  a  life  in  harmony  with  nature.4 
But  exactly  what  they  meant  by  virtue,  beyond  this  inde- 
pendence and  life  of  nature,  is  by  no  means  clear :  it  is  a  fact 
that  their  teaching  was  largely  of  a  negative  character. 

Because  of  their  emphasis  upon  a  renunciation  of  the  goods 
of  civilization,  the  Cynics  found  some  of  the  phases  of  the 
Socratic  teaching  particularly  sympathetic :  in  a  former  chap- 
ter extracts  were  quoted  illustrating  Socrates's  contempt  for 
the  goods  of  this  world — though  as  modified  by  Platonic  ideal- 
ism. The  Cynics  seized  upon  these  same  things,  but  gave 
them  a  very  different  interpretation,  for  they  were  radical 
empiricists.5  Starting  from  these  premises,  they  developed 
a  rule  of  life  which  from  the  first  bore  great  resemblance  to 
that  of  ascetics,  and  which  later  had  a  very  great  influence 
upon  the  development  of  asceticism.  They  taught  that  life 
was  a  constant  struggle  against  evils  and  Hercules  became 

*  These  stories  came  mostly  from  Diogenes  Laertius,  Bk.  VI,  and 
Clement  of  Alexandria;  they  can  be  taken  for  what  they  are  worth.  Cf. 
Schwartz,  CharaTcterkopfe  aus  der  antiJcen  Literatur,  Zweite  Reihe,  I, 
"Diogenes  der  Hund  und  Krates  der  Kyniker. " 

5  The  contempt  in  which  Plato  and  the  Cynics  mutually  held  each 
other  was  due  no  doubt  in  part  to  the  differences  in  their  social  status, 
and  in  part  to  their  radical  philosophical  differences.  Thus  Simplicius 
(Categ.  Schol.  in  Arist.  66b45)  tells  how  Antisthenes  said  to  Plato,  "I 
can  see  a  horse,  but  not  the  idea  of  a  horse."  Plato  replied,  "True, 
for  you  have  the  eye  with  which  one  sees  a  horse,  but  you  are  deficient 
in  the  eye  with  which  one  sees  the  idea  of  a  horse." 


88 

their  patron  god.  They  compared  life  to  the  struggles  of  an 
athlete  (tradition  says  that  one  of  the  early  Cynics  was  a 
boxer  before  he  was  won  for  philosophy)  and  it  was  from 
them  that  came  the  many  similes  to  the  prize-ring,  of  which 
moralists  in  the  Eoman  Empire,  such  as  Seneca  or  St.  Paul, 
were  so  fond. 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  this  is  about  all  that  the  asceticism  of 
the  earlier  Cynicism  amounted  to:  every  philosopher  should 
be  free  from  dependence  upon  anything,  so  should  denounce 
and  reject  all  things;  he  should  do  all  in  his  power  to  harden 
himself  against  them,  and  to  the  practices  employed  to  this 
end,  they  gave  the  name  aa-fcyo-is.  It  has  already  been  seen 
that  certain  of  the  sophists  used  this  term  to  designate  the 
mode  of  life  by  which  one  should  live;  the  Cynics  did  the 
same,  only  their  mode  of  life  was  a  much  more  rigorous  one, 
and  demanded  acts  which  had  never  been  demanded  before. 
As  has  been  seen,  the  Cynics  did  this  as  a  reaction  against 
the  reigning  social  order,  and  not  because  they  had  another 
which  they  wished  to  introduce :  their  ideal  of  aperr)  consisted 
largely  in  foreswearing  all  civilization,  which  they  considered 
the  cause  of  all  vice,  and  by  returning  to  the  happy  state  of 
nature.  They  taught  that  if  a  man  should  train  himself  by 
asceticism,  he  would  be  freed  from  the  temptations  of  the 
world  and  its  lusts.  It  was  in  this  that  the  Cynics  differed 
from  Plato :  Plato  saw  the  chief  enemy  of  the  philosophic  life 
in  the  body,  but  the  Cynics  saw  it  in  civilization;  Plato 
urged  that  one  chastise  the  body,  but  the  Cynics,  with  their 
teaching  that  naturalia,  non  sunt  turpia,  were  willing  to  in- 
dulge such  passions  as  they  considered  natural  (as  the  sexual 
passion),  frequently  in  a  most  shameless  way;  Plato  sought 
things  which  were  ideal  and  social,  the  Cynics  sought  things 
which  were  empirical  and  individual.  Thus  Diogenes  gave 
himself  no  pains  to  chastise  his  sinful  body,  but  fortified  it 
against  desire.  When  some  one  asked  him  what  a  philoso- 
pher should  eat,  he  replied,  "  Whatever  he  can  get,  just  like 


89 


anybody  else."     The  Cynic  life  consisted  in  seeking 

and  the  way  it  did  this  was  by  avoiding  the  lusts  and  desires 

engendered  by  the  civilization  against  which  it  was  a  revolt. 

Such  was  the  asceticism  of  the  early  Cynics.  It  was 
clearly  the  product  of  the  time  which  produced  it  —  the  deca- 
dent Greece  of  the  fourth  century.  From  the  third  to  the 
first  century  before  Christ,  following  upon  the  conquests  of 
Alexander,  things  picked  up  a  little  in  Greece,  and  the  Cynics 
became  less  prominent.  But  after  the  Roman  conquest,  a 
decline  again  began  and  the  school  once  more  came  into  promi- 
nence. A  Neo-Cynicism  then  arose  which  continued  the  tra- 
ditional sturdy  rebelliousness  of  the  early  school;  once  more 
all  the  institutions  of  society  were  subjected  to  the  attacks  of 
popular  wandering  beggars  who  professed  allegiance  to  the 
doctrines  of  Diogenes. 

The  historians  of  the  Imperial  period  frequently  speak  of 
Cynic  preachers,  but  after  all,  one  of  our  best  sources  for 
these  Cynics  is  Lucian,  who  seems  to  have  taken  a  great  in- 
terest in  them,  even  though  his  accounts  are  far  from  sympa- 
thetic. In  many  of  his  writings,  such  as  On  the  Death  of 
Peregrinus,  Zeus  Cross-Examined,  Cynicus,  or  The  Sale  of 
Creeds,  he  gives  descriptions  of  Cynics  and  their  mode  of 
life  which  are  most  enlightening. 

Thus  as  a  description  of  the  typical  Cynic,  one  may  quote 
the  words,  "Who  are  you,  anyway?  You  have  a  beard  and 
long  hair,  but  no  shirt,  and  your  skin  shows  ;  you  go  barefoot, 
choosing  a  wandering  and  inhuman  life  like  the  beasts  ;  un- 
like others,  you  make  your  body  the  object  of  your  austerities, 
and  you  constantly  go  about  from  place  to  place,  sleeping  only 
on  the  hard  ground,  so  that  that  philosopher's  cloak  is  disgust- 
ingly dirty,  though  it  never  was  fine  or  soft  or  bright  col- 
ored."6 Dressed  in  such  a  uniform  and  leading  such  a  life, 
the  Cynics  travelled  over  the  whole  empire,  giving  frequent 
examples  of  their  outspokenness,  not  even  hesitating  to  de- 

«  Luc.  Cyn.  1. 


90 

nounce  the  Emperor  to  his  face  in  the  theater,7  and  carrying 
on  a  warfare  against  the  popular  religions  which  was  scarcely 
less  bitter  than  that  waged  by  the  Christians.8 

The  positive  side  of  their  creed,  in  so  far  as  there  was  any, 
consisted  in  a  preaching  of  brotherhood  (faXavOpcojria)  and  a 
promise  of  liberty  to  those  who  followed  their  mode  of  life. 
But  in  the  main,  now  as  in  the  earlier  period,  the  chief  item 
in  their  creed  was  the  utter  worthlessness  of  all  the  mundane 
things  upon  which  men  ordinarily  set  their  hearts.  The  life 
and  in  particular  the  death  of  a  celebrated  Cynic  of  the  second 
century,  Peregrinus,  make  this  clear. 

In  his  essay  On  the  Death  of  Peregrinus,  Lucian  tells  the 
story  of  this  man.  He  was  born  in  Armenia,  but  while  still 
a  young  man  he  commenced  to  follow  the  wandering  life  of  a 
Cynic.  Lucian  says  that  for  a  while  he  was  associated  with 
the  Christians  in  Palestine,  who  made  much  of  him ;  he  was 
arrested  but  presently  dismissed.  He  returned  to  Armenia ; 
"his  hair  (even  in  these  early  days)  is  long,  his  cloak  is 
shabby ;  at  his  side  is  flung  the  philosopher's  wallet,  his  hand 
grasps  the  philosopher's  staff."  He  distributed  all  the  wealth 
which  had  been  left  him  by  his  father ;  when  the  people  heard 
the  news,  they  said,  "Here  is  true  philosophy;  the  spirit  of 
true  philosophy  is  here."9  Presently,  after  severing  his  con- 
nection with  the  Christians,  he  made  a  trip  of  Egypt.  "  Here 
he  went  through  the  most  interesting  course  of  discipline :  he 
shaved  half  of  his  head  bare,  anointed  his  face  with  mud, 
grossly  exposed  himself  before  a  large  number  of  spectators 
as  a  practical  illustration  of  i  Stoic  indifference,7  received  cas- 
tigation  with  a  birch  rod,  administered  the  same,  and  mysti- 
fied the  public  with  a  number  of  still  more  extravagant 
follies."1  Then  he  went  to  Rome,  where  he  commenced  to 

7  This  is  said  to  have  happened  to  Titus,  Sueton.  Tit.  7 ;  other  examples 
are  given  by  Luc.  de  Morte  Per.  17,  18 ;  Dion  Cass.  66,  5,  13.  Cf .  Ber- 
nays,  p.  29. 

s  Luc.  Zeus  Conf.;  Vit.  Auct.  8.     Bernays,  p.  32ff. 

»  Luc.  de  Morte  Per.  15. 

10  Hid.  17. 


91 

abuse  everybody,  and  particularly  the  Emperor,  until  he  was 
expelled  from  the  city ;  "  he  was  in  every  one's  mouth  as  the 
philosopher  who  was  banished  for  being  too  outspoken,  and 
saying  what  he  thought.  He  took  place  with  Musonius,  Dion 
and  Epictetus.7711  Finally  he  went  to  Greece,  and  there  con- 
ceived the  idea  of  closing  his  life  by  publicly  cremating  him- 
self at  the  Olympic  games.  He  appeared  at  an  important 
moment  during  the  games,  to  announce  his  resolution  and  ex- 
plain it :  Lucian  tells  us  how  he  talked  about  "  the  life  he  had 
lived,  the  risks  he  had  run,  the  trials  he  had  undergone  in 
the  cause  of  philosophy.  .  .  .  Upon  a  golden  life  he  desired 
to  set  a  golden  crown.  He  had  lived  like  Heracles:  like 
Heracles  he  must  die,  and  mingle  with  the  upper  air.  '  It 
is  my  aim,7  he  continued,  '  to  benefit  mankind ;  to  teach  them 
how  contemptible  a  thing  is  death.'"12  A  pyre  was  pre- 
pared, and  it  was  announced  that  the  cremation  would  take 
place  at  midnight.  "  Then  Proteus  (i.e.,  Peregrinus)  threw 
aside  his  scrip  and  cloak  and  club — his  club  of  Heracles — 
and  stood  before  them  in  scrupulously  unclean  linen.  He  de- 
manded frankincense  to  throw  upon  the  fire ;  being  supplied, 
he  first  threw  it  on,  then,  turning  to  the  south,  he  exclaimed : 
'Gods  of  my  mother,  gods  of  my  father,  receive  me  with 
favor.7  With  these  words  he  leaped  into  the  fire.7713  Nat- 
urally this  act  aroused  the  greatest  interest  and  many  came 
to  regard  Peregrinus  as  superhuman ;  legends  grew  up  about 
him,  statues  were  erected  to  him.14 

Lucian7s  entire  treatment  of  the  story  of  Peregrinus  is 
most  severe.  He  ascribed  all  of  his  activity  to  the  basest 
motives,  particularly  love  of  notoriety,  and  pictured  him  as  a 
most  blatant  impostor.  But  it  is  far  from  certain  that  this 
is  a  just  estimation  of  him.  The  great  Cynic  made  a  very 
different  impression  upon  Aulus  Gellius,  who  had  frequently 

11  Hid.  18. 

12  Ibid.  32,  33. 
is  Ibid.  36. 

i* /did.  40, 41. 


92 

visited  him  during  his  student  days  at  Athens,  and  who  found 
him  a  serious  and  high-minded  man.15  It  is  an  undeniable 
fact  that  Cynicism  did  appeal  to  persons  in  the  lower  classes 
of  society,  and  undoubtedly  it  attracted  many  unscrupulous 
impostors,  but  it  is  equally  certain  that  many  Cynics  had 
lofty  characters,  and  it  is  quite  possible  that  in  his  self- 
immolation  Peregrinus  sincerely  wished  to  give  men  a  prac- 
tical lesson  teaching  contempt  of  death.16 

Another  Cynic,  with  much  the  same  gospel,  but  a  very  dif- 
ferent method  of  teaching  it,  was  the  gentle  sage  Demonax. 
His  character  was  such  that  he  even  won  the  admiration  of 
that  universal  scoffer  Lucian,  who  had  "  long  consorted  with 
him,"  and  who  wrote  his  biography  "to  keep  his  memory 
green,  and  provide  the  most  earnest  of  those  who  aspire  to 
philosophy  with  a  contemporary  pattern."17  A  Cyprian  by 
birth,  he  came  of  an  influential  family,  but  "  his  views  soared 
above  such  things  as  wealth ;  he  claimed  nothing  less  than  the 
highest,  and  devoted  himself  to  philosophy."18  His  teachers, 
Epictetus,  Demetrius  and  others,  taught  him  to  lay  the  great- 
est stress  upon  self-sufficiency,  freedom  from  fear  and  hope, 
and  a  good  disposition.  "  He  took  independence  and  candor 
for  his  guiding  principles,  lived  himself  an  upright,  whole- 
some, irreproachable  life,  and  exhibited  to  all  who  saw  or 
heard  him  the  model  of  his  own  disposition  and  philosophic 
sincerity.  .  .  .  He  was  consistent  enough,  when  he  found 
that  he  could  no  longer  suffice  to  himself,  to  depart  volun- 
tarily from  life,  leaving  a  great  reputation  behind  him  among 
the  nobility  of  Greece."19  Lucian  has  preserved  for  us  many 

is  Aul.  Gell.  xii,  11. 

i«  Cf.  Dill,  Roman  Society  from  Nero  to  Marcus  Aurelius,  pp.  356ff.; 
M.  Croisset,  Un  ascete  paien  au  siecle  des  Antonius.  Peregrinus  Protee, 
in  the  Memoires  .  .  .  del  'Academie  .  .  .  de  Montpellier,  1880,  vol.  vi,  pp. 
455-491.  Zeller,  Alexander  und  Peregrinus,  in  Deutsche  Rundschau, 
Sept.,  1876. 

17  Luc.  Demon.  1,  2. 

is  Hid.  3. 

is  Hid.  3, 4. 


93 

of  his  biting  criticisms  of  men  of  his  day,  and  also  his  teach- 
ing of  the  insignificant  value  of  worldly  goods.  "  To  all 
who  repined  at  poverty,  resented  exile,  or  complained  of  old 
age  or  bad  health,  he  administered  laughing  consolation,  and 
bade  them  not  forget  how  soon  their  troubles  would  be  over, 
the  distinction  between  good  and  bad  be  obsolete,  and  long 
freedom  succeed  to  short-lived  distress."20  He  lived  to  be 
nearly  a  hundred  years  old,  free  from  disease  and  pain,  bur- 
dening no  man,  asking  no  man's  favors,  serving  his  friends, 
and  having  no  enemies.  Not  Athens  only,  but  all  Greece 
was  so  in  love  with  him  that  as  he  passed,  great  men  would 
give  him  place  and  there  would  be  a  general  hush.  Baker 
wives  would  contend  for  the  honor  of  supplying  him,  while 
children  used  to  call  him  father  and  make  him  presents  of 
fruit.21  When  he  died,  the  Athenians  gave  him  a  public 
funeral,  his  body  was  borne  to  the  grave  by  philosophers,  and 
his  memory  held  sacred.22 

The  best  account  of  the  Cynics,  however,  and  the  most 
sympathetic,  is  the  one  given  by  Epictetus,23  who  was  himself 
a  Cynic  or  nearly  one.  According  to  him,  the  true  Cynic 
"must  know  that  he  is  sent  a  messenger  from  Zeus  to  men 
about  good  and  bad  things,  to  show  them  that  they  have  wan- 
dered and  are  seeking  the  substance  of  good  and  evil  where 
it  is  not,  but  where  it  is  they  never  think.  ...  In  fact  the 
Cynic  is  a  spy  of  the  things  which  are  good  for  men  and 
which  are  evil,  and  it  is  his  duty  to  examine  carefully  and 
to  come  and  report  truly,  and  not  to  be  struck  with  terror 
so  as  to  point  out  as  enemies  things  which  are  not  enemies, 
nor  in  any  other  way  to  be  perturbed  by  appearances  nor  con- 
founded."24 "  Man,  the  Cynic  is  the  father  of  all  men ;  the 
men  are  his  sons,  the  women  are  his  daughters:  he  so  care- 

20  Ibid.  8. 
« Ibid.  63. 

22  Ibid.  67. 

23  Diss.  iii  22. 

24  ibid.  §23-25  (Schenkl). 


94 

fully  visits  all,  so  well  does  he  care  for  all.  Do  you  think 
that  it  is  from  idle  impatience  that  he  rebukes  those  whom 
he  meets  ?  He  does  it  as  a  father,  as  a  brother,  and  as  the 
minister  of  the  father  of  all,  the  minister  of  Zeus."25  Such 
is  the  lofty  calling  of  the  true  Cynic,  and  one  must  constantly 
labor  to  make  himself  worthy  of  it. 

In  the  course  of  his  essay,  Epictetus  gives  several  examples 
of  Cynic  diatribes,  which  well  illustrate  the  teachings  of  his 
school.  Thus  he  teaches  that  power  and  happiness  are  not 
to  be  found  in  external  things.  "You  seek  for  prosperity 
and  happiness  where  they  are  not,"  the  ideal  Cynic  teacher 
is  made  to  declaim,  "  and  if  another  shows  you  where  they 
are,  you  do  not  believe  him.  Why  do  you  seek  it  without  ? 
In  the  body  ?  It  is  not  there.  If  you  doubt,  look  at  Myro, 
look  at  Ophellius.  In  possessions  ?  It  is  not  there.  But  if 
you  do  not  believe  me,  look  at  Croesus :  look  at  those  who  are 
now  rich,  with  what  lamentations  their  life  is  filled.  In 
power?  It  is  not  there.  If  it  were,  those  would  be  happy 
who  have  been  twice  or  thrice  consuls,  but  they  are  not."26 
Again,  he  holds  himself  up  as  a  model  of  how  one  should  act 
to  be  happy,  and  incidentally  gives  an  excellent  picture  of 
a  Cynic : 

"And  how  is  it  possible  that  a  man  who  has  nothing,  who  is 
naked,  houseless,  without  a  hearth,  squalid,  without  a  slave,  with- 
out a  city,  can  pass  a  life  that  flows  easily?  See,  God  has  sent 
you  a  man  to  show  you  by  his  acts  that  it  is  possible.  Look  at 
me,  who  am  without  city,  without  a  house,  without  possessions, 
without  a  slave;  I  sleep  on  the  ground,  I  have  no  wife,  no  chil- 
dren, no  praetormm,  but  only  the  earth  and  heavens,  and  one 
poor  cloak.  And  what  do  I  want  ?  Am  I  not  without  sorrow  ? 
am  I  not  without  fear?  am  I  not  free?  When  did  any  of  you 
see  me  failing  in  the  object  of  my  desire?  or  falling  into  that 
which  I  would  avoid?  Did  I  ever  blame  God  or  man?  did  I 

25  ma.  §  81-82. 

26  Ibid.  §  26-27. 


95 

ever  accuse  any  man  ?  did  any  of  you  ever  see  me  with  a  sorrowful 
countenance?  And  how  do  I  meet  with  those  whom  you  are 
afraid  of  and  admire  ?  Do  I  not  treat  them  like  slaves  ?  Who, 
when  he  sees  me,,  does  not  think  that  he  sees  his  king  and 
master?"27 

To  become  a  true  Cynic  "  in  the  first  place,  in  the  things  which 
relate  to  yourself,  you  must  not  be  in  any  respect  like  what  you 
are  now :  you  must  not  blame  God  or  man :  you  must  take  away 
desire  altogether,  you  must  transfer  avoidance  only  to  the  things 
which  are  within  the  power  of  the  will :  you  must  not  feel  anger 
nor  resentment  nor  envy  nor  pity ;  a  girl  must  not  appear  hand- 
some to  you,  nor  must  you  love  a  little  reputation,  nor  be  pleased 
with  a  boy  or  a  cake."28 

Since  the  Cynic  has  this  high  calling  of  reproving  other 
people's  vices,  he  must  be  very  careful  to  suppress  his  own. 
As  Epictetus  says : 

"  Before  all,  the  Cynic's  ruling  faculty  must  be  purer  than  the 
sun;  and  if  it  is  not,  he  must  necessarily  be  a  cunning  knave 
and  a  fellow  of  no  principle,  since  while  he  is  himself  entangled 
in  some  vice  he  will  reprove  others.  For  see  how  the  matter 
stands:  to  these  kings  and  tyrants,  their  guards  and  arms  give 
the  power  of  reproving  some  persons,  and  of  being  able  even  to 
punish  those  who  do  wrong,  though  they  are  themselves  bad ;  but 
to  a  Cynic,  instead  of  arms  and  guards,  it  is  conscience  which 
gives  this  power.  When  he  knows  that  he  has  watched  and 
labored  for  mankind,  and  has  slept  pure,  and  sleep  has  left  him 
still  purer,  and  that  he  has  thought  whatever  he  has  thought  as  a 
friend  of  the  gods,  as  a  minister,  as  a  participator  of  the  power 
of  Zeus,  and  that  on  all  occasions  he  is  ready  to  say,  'Lead  me, 
0  Zeus,  and  thou,  0  Destiny ' ;  and  also,  if  it  so  pleases  the  gods, 
so  let  it  be ;  why  should  he  not  have  confidence  to  speak  freely  to 
his  own  brothers,  to  his  children,  in  a  word,  to  his  kinsmen  ?  "29 

27  iud.  §  45-49. 

28  ma.  §  13. 

20  Ibid.  §  93-96. 


96 

The  Cynic,  above  all  men,  must  not  indulge  in  the  com- 
forts of  civilization,  even  friendship :  this  is  not  only  because 
these  are  really  not  good,  but  also  because  he  must  give  all  his 
strength  to  following  his  high  calling.  A  young  man  asked 
Epictetus  if  a  Cynic,  when  sick,  might  go  to  the  house  of  a 
friend  to  be  cared  for,  and  received  as  a  reply : 

"  And  where  shall  you  find,  I  ask,  a  Cynic's  friend  ?  For  the 
man  who  invites  ought  to  be  such  another  as  the  Cynic,  that  he 
may  be  worthy  of  being  reckoned  the  Cynic's  friend.  He  ought 
to  be  a  partner  in  the  Cynic's  scepter  and  his  royalty,  and  a 
worthy  minister,  if  he  intends  to  be  considered  worthy  of  a 
Cynic's  friendship,  as  Diogenes  was  a  friend  of  Antisthenes,  as 
Crates  was  a  friend  of  Diogenes.  Do  you  think  that  if  a  man 
comes  to  a  Cynic  and  salutes  him,  that  he  is  the  Cynic's  friend, 
and  that  the  Cynic  will  think  him  worthy  of  receiving  a  Cynic 
into  his  house  ?  So  that  if  you  please,  reflect  on  this  also :  rather 
look  around  for  some  convenient  dunghill  upon  which  you  shall 
bear  your  fever  and  which  will  shelter  you  from  the  north  wind 
that  you  may  not  be  chilled.  But  you  seem  to  me  to  wish  to  go 
to  some  man's  house  and  to  be  well  fed  there  for  a  time.  Why 
then  do  you  think  of  attempting  so  great  a  thing  as  the  life  of  a 
Cynic?"30 

ISTor  is  marriage  permitted  to  a  true  Cynic:  a  wife  and 
children  would  impose  upon  him  cares  and  duties  which  he 
has  not  the  right  to  take,31  for  his  services  are  demanded  for 
all  humanity,  who  are  his  children.  What  the  Cynic  gives 
society  is  of  more  value  than  many  children. 

"In  the  name  of  God,  are  those  men  greater  benefactors  to 
society  who  introduce  into  the  world  to  occupy  their  own  pleas- 
ures two  or  three  grunting  children,  or  those  who  superintend,  as 
far  as  they  can,  all  mankind,  and  see  what  they  do,  how  they  live, 
what  they  attend  to,  what  they  neglect  contrary  to  their  duty."32 

so  Hid.  §  62-66. 
si  Ibid.  §  69ff. 
32  lUd.  §  77. 


97 

But  Epictetus  has  the  sharpest  criticism  for  the  Cynics  of 
his  day.  He  speaks  with  contempt  of  "  the  present  Cynics 
who  are  dogs  that  wait  at  tables,  and  in  no  respect  imitate 
the  Cynics  of  old,  except  perhaps  in  breaking  wind,  but  in 
nothing  else."33  He  denounces  the  dirtiness  which  was  so 
characteristic  of  the  Cynics  of  his  day,  and  urges  all  true 
Cynics  to  maintain  a  respectable  appearance. 

"  It  is  necessary  for  a  Cynic  to  have  a  certain  habit  of  body : 
for  if  he  appears  to  be  consumptive,  thin  and  pale,  his  testimony 
has  not  then  the  same  weight.  For  he  must  not  only  by  showing 
the  qualities  of  his  soul  prove  to  the  vulgar  that  it  is  in  his 
power,  independent  of  the  things  which  they  admire,  to  be  a  good 
man,  but  he  must  also  show  by  his  body  that  his  simple  and 
frugal  way  of  living  in  the  open  air  does  not  even  injure  the 
body.  See,  he  says,  I  am  a  proof  of  this,  and  my  own  body  also 
is.  So  Diogenes  used  to  do,  for  he  used  to  go  about  fresh-look- 
ing, and  he  attracted  the  notice  of  many  by  his  personal  appear- 
ance. But  if  a  Cynic  is  an  object  of  compassion,  he  seems  to  be 
a  beggar:  all  persons  turn  away  from  him.  He  ought  not  to 
appear  dirty,  so  as  not  to  drive  away  men  by  it;  but  his  very 
roughness  ought  to  be  clean  and  attractive."34 

During  this  same  period,  there  were  many  other  popular 
teachers  who  were  not  avowed  Cynics,  but  who  shared  many 
of  their  doctrines  and  methods  of  teaching.  One  of  these, 
who  lived  in  the  early  years  of  the  Eoman  Empire,  was 
Musonius  Rufus.  The  fragments  of  his  diatribes  which  re- 
main fill  only  a  small  book,  but  one  of  these  is  entitled  Trepl 
aovcTjWe)?,  and  well  serves  to  show  how  much  he  was  in  sym- 
pathy with  the  ideas  already  described.  His  idea  of  virtue 
was  a  very  practical  one,  requiring  constant  effort  and  prac- 
tice, or  a07C77<m.  "He  strongly  urged  askesis  upon  those 
hearing  him,  always  using  these  words:  f  Virtue/  he  would 
say,  'is  not  theoretical  knowledge  only,  but  also  practical, 
like  medicine  or  music."35  Then  through  several  pages  his 

« ibid.  §  so. 

a*  Ibid.  §  86-89. 

ss  Muson.  p.  22,  ed.  Hense. 


98 

idea  of  the  ascetic  life  is  developed,  in  terms  which  parallel 
those  of  his  contemporaries.  "  The  ascetic  must  lead  a  supe- 
rior life,  not  be  pleased  with  pleasure,  nor  avoid  pain,  not 
love  life  nor  fear  death,  and  not  esteem  possessions  so  much 
that  he  will  set  himself  to  acquiring  them."36 

Contemporary  with  this  revival  of  Cynicism,  came  a  re- 
vival of  Pythagoreanism  as  a  popular  ethical  system.  The 
older  Pythagoreanism  had  continued  down  to  the  end  of  the 
fourth  century,  for  frequent  references  to  abstinence  from 
beans  and  flesh  are  found  in  the  Middle  Comedy,37  but 
during  the  two  following  centuries  we  hear  very  little  of  the 
school  and  its  tenets.  In  the  last  century  before  our  era, 
however,  there  was  a  great  revival  of  interest  in  the  Pytha- 
gorean rule  of  life,  and  from  that  time  until  the  end  of  the 
antique  world,  the  tradition  remained  unbroken.  A  frag- 
ment of  Alexander  Polyhistor  speaks  of  Neo-Pythagoreans 
in  his  time  (B.C.  80-69)  ;38  a  contemporary  of  Cicero, 
Nigidius  Figulus,  established  the  school  at  Rome.  After 
that  time  the  number  of  ]STeo-Pythagoreans  was  more  numer- 
ous :  in  the  first  century  there  were  Apollonius  of  Tyana  and 
Moderatus  as  the  most  eminent,  in  the  second  century,  Nicho- 
machus  and  JSTumenius,  in  the  third,  Philostratus,  while 
others,  such  as  Jamblichus  and  Porphyry,  were  profoundly 
interested  in  these  doctrines. 

At  this  period  the  school  was  of  a  popular  nature.  Many 
of  its  teachers,  like  Apollonius  of  Tyana,  went  about  in  a 
manner  almost  like  that  of  the  Cynics,  just  described ;  others 
adopted  more  literary  methods  of  propaganda,  and  wrote 
numerous  popular  books,  such  as  the  numerous  lives  of  Pytha- 
goras,39 Philostratus's  life  of  Apollonius,  or  Porphyry's  tract 

36  Hid.,  p.  27. 

37  Vid.  sup.,  p.  42,  n.  40. 
ss  Diog.  Laert.  VIII  24ff. 

3»  Lives  were  written  by  Moderatus,  Nichomachus,  Antonius,  Apol- 
lonius, Porphyry,  Jamblichus,  etc.  Cf.  Bohde,  Die  Quellen  des  Jam- 
blichus in  seiner  Biographic  des  Pythagoras,  in  Kleine  Schriften,  II, 
pp.  102-172. 


99 

against  animal  food.  Some  members  of  the  school,  it  is  to 
be  admitted,  were  more  profound  philosophers,  and  developed 
ideas  upon  the  One  and  the  Many,  and  God  and  Matter,  which 
were  used  by  the  N~eo-Platonists  later,  but  for  most  of  its 
members,  the  E"eo-Pythagorean  school  confined  itself  to  offer- 
ing the  Pythagorean  rule  as  a  guide  to  life. 

This  rule  was  supposed  to  be  the  one  taught  by  Pythagoras 
himself.  Here  are  the  terms  in  which  Jamblichus  described 
the  teaching  of  the  master :  "  the  best  polity,  popular  concord, 
community  of  possessions  among  friends,  the  worship  of  the 
gods,  piety  to  the  dead,  legislation,  erudition,  silence,  absti- 
nence from  animals,  continence,  temperance,  sagacity,  divin- 
ity, and  in  a  word,  whatever  is  sought  after  by  lovers  of 
learning,  was  brought  to  light  by  Pythagoras."40  The  ascetic 
features  of  the  rule  were  obvious :  five  years  of  silent  contem- 
plation were  demanded,41  meat  or  beans  could  not  be  eaten,42 
and  abstinence  from  wine  was  required  ;43  some  went  beyond 
the  letter  of  the  rule,  and  rejected  marriage.44 

These  two  distinct  schools  show  how  great  was  the  propa- 
ganda during  the  early  part  of  the  Roman  Empire  which 
taught  the  renunciation  of  the  goods  of  this  world,  and  urged 
a  veritably  ascetic  mode  of  life.  The  two  schools  which  have 
been  mentioned,  the  Cynics  and  the  Neo-Pythagoreans,  ex- 
emplified these  tendencies  more  clearly  than  any  others,  but 
they  were  not  unique.  There  was  a  host  of  other  popular 
preachers,  who  attached  themselves  to  no  school  in  particular, 
but  who  taught  the  same  doctrines  that  have  already  been 
outlined.  One  example  of  this  type  is  the  celebrated  Dion 
Chrysostom,  whose  preserved  orations  contain  ascetic  senti- 
ments in  great  quantities,  but  ones  differing  but  little  from 
what  has  already  been  seen.45  Another  example  of  the  popu- 

*o  Jamb.  Vit.  Pyth.  6,  cf .  20ff. 

4iPhilostr.  Vit.  Apol.  I  14;  Luc.  Vit.  Auct.  3. 

42Philostr.  I  8,  21;  II  6,  26,  etc.;  Luc.  Vit.  Auct.  6. 

43philostr.  18;  II  7;  etc. 

«  Philostr.  I  13. 

*5  Cf.  von  Arnim,  Das  ~Leben  und  WerTce  des  Dion  von  Prusa  (1898). 


100 

lar  teaching  of  the  day  is  found  in  Seneca's  account  of  his 
early  training,  which  is  worth  quoting  in  full. 

"  Indeed,  as  I  heard  Attains  declaiming  against  the  vices,  the 
errors  and  the  evil  of  life,  I  frequently  bewailed  the  human  race, 
and  I  believed  him  sublime  and  above  human  rank.  He  said  of 
himself  that  he  was  king.  But  to  me  he  seemed  something  more, 
for  he  justly  censured  kings.  When  he  commenced  to  commend 
poverty,  and  to  show  that  whatever  was  superfluous  was  an  un- 
necessary burden  and  hardly  to  be  borne,  it  frequently  seemed 
pleasant  to  go  forth  from  the  school  poor.  When  he  com- 
menced to  accuse  our  pleasures  and  to  praise  a  chaste  body,  a 
sober  table,  and  a  mind  free  not  only  from  illicit  pleasures  but 
also  from  superfluous  ones,  it  was  pleasant  to  restrain  gluttony 
and  the  belly.  A  part  of  this  still  persists  with  me,  Luculus,  for 
I  approached  all  with  great  enthusiasm.  When  reduced  to  civil 
life,  I  retained  a  few  of  the  things  thus  well  begun.  Because  of 
this,  I  have  renounced  oysters  and  mushrooms  during  my  whole 
life.  For  they  are  not  food  but  amusement,  encouraging  those 
who  are  already  filled  to  eat  more,  which  is  most  pleasant  to  the 
gluttonous  and  those  stuffing  themselves  with  more  than  they  can 
hold,  as  they  descend  readily  and  are  as  readily  given  back.  Be- 
cause of  this,  I  have,  during  my  whole  life,  abstained  from  per- 
fume, since  the  best  odor  for  the  body  is  none  at  all.  Because 
of  this,  my  stomach  has  ever  gone  without  wine.  Because  of  this, 
I  have  fled  warm  baths  all  my  life,  believing  that  they  weaken  the 
body,  while  seething  it  is  a  useless  and  over  delicate  thing. 
Though  I  have  broken  off  from  complete  abstinence  from  certain 
other  things,  there  remains  a  severe  rule  of  life  which  is  almost 
abstinence,  and  which  may  even  be  more  difficult,  since  it  is 
easier  to  cut  some  things  off  from  the  soul  altogether  than  to 
temper  them. 

"  Since  I  have  begun  to  explain  to  you  with  how  much  greater 
enthusiasm  I  approached  philosophy  as  a  youth  than  I  now  pro- 
ceed with  it  as  an  old  man,  I  shall  not  shame  to  say  with  what 
love  Pythagoras  inspired  me.  Sotion  told  me  why  he  had  ab- 
stained from  animals,  and  why  Sextius  subsequently  did.  Their 
reasons  were  different,  but  both  were  magnificent.  .  .  .  When 


101 

Sotion  had  exposed  these  things  and  completed  them  with  argu- 
ments of  his  own,  he  used  to  say,  '  Do  you  not  believe  that  souls 
are  placed  in  other  bodies  and  other  things,  and  that  what  we 
call  death  is  a  migration?  Do  you  not  believe  that  what  was 
formerly  the  soul  of  a  man  still  survives  in  the  beasts  or  cattle 
or  the  fish  of  the  sea?  Do  you  not  believe  that  nothing  perishes 
in  this  world,  but  only  changes  place?  and  that  the  celestial 
bodies  are  not  turned  through  given  orbits  any  more  than  animate 
ones  go  through  their  changes  in  order  and  are  driven  through 
the  world  to  souls  ?  Great  men  have  believed  that.  Therefore, 
suspend  your  judgment  for  a  while  and  think  these  matters  over 
carefully.  If  things  really  are  thus,  to  abstain  from  animals  is 
innocense;  if  this  is  false,  to  do  so  is  frugality.  What  part  of 
your  credulity  is  destroyed  here?  I  snatch  from  you  the  food 
of  lions  and  vultures/  Incited  by  such  exhortations,  I  com- 
menced to  abstain  from  animals,  and  after  the  lapse  of  a  year, 
this  custom  was  not  only  easy  for  me  but  also  pleasant.  I  be- 
lieved that  my  mind  was  more  active,  nor  today  can  I  affirm  that 
this  was  not  the  case.  Do  you  ask  how  I  came  to  stop  ?  Well, 
the  period  of  my  youth  fell  in  the  first  years  of  the  reign  of 
Tiberius  Caesar.  At  that  time  foreign  priests  were  expelled, 
and  among  the  arguments  for  their  superstition  was  placed  the 
abstinence  of  some  of  them  from  meat.  So  upon  being  re- 
quested by  my  father,  who  did  not  fear  calumny  but  who  hated 
philosophy,  I  returned  to  my  original  custom.  Nor  was  it  hard 
for  him  to  persuade  me  to  take  up  a  better  fare. 

"  Attalus  also  used  to  praise  a  mattress  which  would  resist  the 
body :  even  as  an  old  man,  I  use  one  in  which  an  impression  can- 
not remain.  I  have  related  these  things  in  order  that  I  might 
prove  to  you  how  eagerly  the  young  recruits  receive  the  first 
impulse  towards  the  good."46 

The  question  of  the  origin  of  this  asceticism  is  a  compli- 
cated one.  It  has  been  seen  that  Cynicism  and  Pythagorean- 
ism  traced  their  origins  back  to  the  earlier  period  of  Greek 
history,  the  one  to  certain  phases  of  the  Socratic  teaching,  and 
the  other  to  the  Greek  Pythagoras.  To  a  great  extent  the 
«  Sen.  Ep.  ad  Luc.  108,  13-17,  20-23. 


102 

movement  was  the  development  of  germs  found  in  Greece 
from  early  times ;  social  conditions  became  such  that  a  teach- 
ing of  the  slight  value  of  worldly  gains  became  desirable,  so 
certain  persons  developed  these  previously  existing  germs. 
But  on  the  other  hand,  it  has  been  seen  that  at  just  this  time 
there  was  a  great  influx  of  oriental  ascetics  into  the  Empire : 
their  asceticism,  too,  had  the  redeeming  features  which  were 
so  sorely  needed  by  the  age,  and  must  have  suggested  many 
things  to  their  contemporary  Greek  fellow  teachers.  As  a 
matter  of  fact,  if  the  teaching  of  these  Greek  schools  is  exam- 
ined, many  traces  of  such  oriental  influence  will  be  observed. 
The  similarities  between  the  Cynics  and  the  Galli  are  patent, 
and  undoubtedly  many  Cynics  consciously  imitated  these  wor- 
shippers of  Cybele.  It  is  a  very  significant  fact  that  Pere- 
grinus  underwent  his  severest  asceticism  in  Egypt  where,  as 
has  been  seen,  native  asceticism  was  strong,  and  tended  to- 
wards the  extravagances  recorded  of  Peregrinus  during  his 
stay  there.  Many  of  the  ascetic  practices  indulged  in  at  this 
period  were  quite  foreign  to  occidental  peoples:  Seneca  ob- 
jected to  ascetics  who  castrated  themselves,47  but  this  act  was 
something  unknown  to  the  Greeks  and  Romans,  so  was  un- 
doubtedly suggested  by  the  orientals.  It  may  even  be  asked 
whether  the  "  scrupulous  filthiness  "  of  the  later  Cynics  was 
not  an  imported  feature,  for,  as  Epictetus  has  been  seen  to 
point  out,  this  was  foreign  to  Diogenes.  The  lives  of  Pytha- 
goras dating  from  this  period  say  that  he  learned  his  wisdom 
from  the  Egyptians  and  Babylonians ;  the  first  books  of  Phi- 
lostratus's  life  of  Apollonius  are  devoted  to  a  journey  he  is 
said  to  have  made  to  India  to  learn  the  wisdom  of  the  Hindus 
— which  wisdom  was  of  course  ascetic:  these  trips  to  India 
became  very  common  in  the  popular  literature  of  the  day,  and 
stories  of  Indian  ascetics  became  very  current. 

Among  these  Indian  stories,  that  of  Calenus,  an  Indian 
who  immolated  himself  in  the  time  of  Augustus,  thus  becom- 

47  Nat.  Q.  vii  31,  3. 


103 

ing  a  hero  for  many,  and  perhaps  suggesting  the  idea  to  Pere- 
grinus,  is  a  pre-eminent  one.  Strabo  tells  the  story  of  how 
he  came  with  an  embassy  to  Augustus,  and  while  at  Athens, 
in  the  presence  of  an  astonished  crowd  and  perhaps  of  the 
Emperor  himself,  he  anointed  himself  and  leaped  smilingly 
upon  a  pyre.  A  tomb  was  raised  which  was  visible  as  late 
as  the  age  of  Plutarch,  upon  which  his  self-immolation  was 
recorded.  How  much  attention  this  act  attracted  in  the  west 
is  shown  by  the  numerous  references  to  it  in  literature;48 
Josephus  even  makes  his  hero  Eleazer  hold  Calanus  up  as  a 
model  to  his  men,49  and  it  has  been  suggested  that  St.  Paul 
had  his  act  in  mind  when  he  wrote,  "  And  if  I  give  my  body 
to  be  burned,  but  have  not  love,  it  profiteth  me  nothing."50 

It  is  safe  to  conclude,  therefore,  that  a  considerable  oriental 
influence  was  exercised  in  the  development  of  this  popular 
asceticism  of  the  time  of  the  Roman  Empire.  But  it  is  also 
clear  that  this  oriental  influence  only  modified  the  form  in 
which  the  Greek  ascetic  ideas  were  expressed:  it  did  not 
bring  the  asceticism  itself  into  being:  the  social  condition  of 
the  Roman  Empire  did  that.  Nor  did  it  contribute  the  fun- 
damental ideas  upon  which  this  asceticism  was  based,  for 
these  have  been  observed  in  Greece  long  before  this  oriental 
influence  could  have  begun.  Orientals  suggested  a  few  ex- 
travagant acts  for  outwardly  expressing  these  ideas,  but  it 
was  the  Greeks  themselves  who  contributed  the  idea  that  all 
mundane  things  are  to  be  considered  as  useless  or  worse,  and 
that  the  body  and  its  cares  are  the  greatest  enemy  to  the  soul 
and  virtue. 

It  may  be  remarked  here,  too,  that  the  early  Christians 
eagerly  seized  upon  both  oriental  expression  and  Greek  idea, 
for  they  found  in  them  a  most  valuable  corollary  to  their 
teaching  of  another  world — an  idea  which  received  little  at- 
tention among  the  Greeks  whom  we  have  just  been  studying. 

« Strabo  xv  1,  73  (270);  4  (686);  Dion  Cass.  66,  9;  Plut.  Ft*.  Alex. 
69;  Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  iv  571;  Aelian  Far.  Hist.  v.  6. 
*»  Jos.  Bell.  Jud.  vii  87. 
so  Lightf  oot,  Colossians,  p.  394,  n.  2. 


CHAPTEE   VI 

PHILOSOPHICAL  ASCETICISM 

In  the  preceding  chapter  it  was  seen  how,  beginning  in  the 
last  century  before  Christ,  large  numbers  of  people  began 
to  give  themselves  over  to  all  sorts  of  ascetic  practices ;  from 
the  opening  of  this  century  until  the  end  of  the  pagan  world, 
such  practices  became  ever  more  popular.  The  persons  who 
did  such  things,  however,  did  not  do  them  from  strictly  re- 
ligious motives,  but  rather  from,  ethical  ones :  the  asceticism 
which  has  been  described  was  a  distinctly  ethical  asceticism. 
Two  different  sorts  of  asceticism  have  been  found  in  the 
Roman  Empire,  then,  one  religious  and  largely  oriental,  the 
other  ethical,  and  more  distinctly  Greek — though  it  too  was 
influenced  by  oriental  forces.  But  there  was  a  third  sort 
as  well,  which  must  be  described  before  the  present  study  will 
be  complete. 

In  general,  the  persons  whose  activities  were  described  in 
the  last  chapter  were  not  very  philosophic  persons ;  they  were 
not  the  sort  who  would  think  things  through  and  formulate 
a  reasoned  exposition  of  the  grounds  for  their  conduct ;  they 
were  content  to  invoke  a  few  general  conceptions  and  let 
it  go  at  that.  But  at  the  same  time  there  were  other  persons, 
likewise  interested  in  asceticism,  who  were  more  deep-think- 
ing. These  latter  were  profoundly  influenced  by  the  more 
popular  asceticism  which  they  saw  about  them,  and  which 
was  undoubtedly  the  determining  cause  of  their  own,  but 
owing  to  their  character,  they  could  not  rest  content  until 
they  had  worked  out  a  rationale  of  the  whole  thing.  These 
more  philosophic  persons  therefore  formulated  a  philosophy 
of  asceticism  which  stated  in  enduring  terms  the  confusedly- 

104 


105 

felt  aspirations  of  the  popular  ascetics  of  their  day.  Not 
only  do  they  serve  to  clarify  this  popular  movement,  but  they 
also  show  how  great  a  part  of  the  attention  of  even  the  highly 
intellectual  classes  was  devoted  to  such  subjects:  after  the 
time  of  Christ,  all  the  great  thinkers  gave  much  attention  to 
the  subject,  doing  so  to  a  greater  and  greater  extent  as  time 
went  on,  so  that  it  is  possible  to  say  that  all  the  philosophy 
of  fading  Hellas  was  a  philosophy  of  asceticism. 

During  the  period  of  the  Roman  Empire,  two  philosophies 
predominated,  Stoicism  and  Neo-Platonism.  Of  course  there 
were  many  others,  but  the  eclecticism1  of  the  time  was  so 
great  that  nearly  all  the  schools  shared  much  the  same  ideas, 
and  differed  only  in  the  emphasis  which  they  placed  upon 
one  idea  or  another ;  much  the  same  results  might  be  obtained 
by  a  study  of  others,  but  the  ones  which  developed  the  ascetic 
side  the  most,  and  which  are  therefore  best  adapted  for  our 
present  purposes,  are  the  ones  just  mentioned. 

The  Stoic  school  arose  at  the  end  of  the  fourth  century  as 
a  development  of  Cynicism.  Zeno,  its  founder,  had  been 
attracted  towards  the  Cynics  in  his  youth,  and  both  he  and 
his  followers  always  had  a  high  opinion  of  Cynic  virtue. 
Many  of  the  fundamental  Cynic  ideas,  such  as  those  of  self- 
sufficiency,  impassibility,  indifference  to  externals,  were  in- 
corporated into  Stoicism;  the  chief  difference  between  the 
two  schools,  in  fact,  lay  in  the  polemic  nature  of  the  Cynics, 
which  the  Stoics  did  not  share.  The  early  Stoics,  Zeno, 
Cleanthes  and  Chrysippus,  did  not  give  great  attention  to 
asceticism,  and  as  much  may  be  said  for  their  successors  in 
what  is  sometimes  called  the  Middle  Stoa,  which  is  marked 
by  Panaetius  and  Posidonius,  who  flourished,  the  former  in 
the  last  half  of  the  second  century,  the  latter  in  the  first  half 
of  the  first  B.C.  But,  as  has  been  seen,  there  was  not  much 
asceticism  of  any  kind  at  this  period.  This  absence  of  philo- 

i  The  volume  of  Zeller  which  deals  with  the  first  part  of  this  period  is 
called  Eclecticism,  in  the  English  translation. 


106 

sophical  asceticism  merely  parallels  the  absence  of  any  other 
kind,  and  the  general  prosperous  condition  of  the  Hellenistic 
world.  By  the  time  of  Posidonius,  however,  the  ascetic 
movement  was  beginning  again,  and  he  is  not  without  im- 
portance for  later  development.  With  him  a  new  spirit  was 
brought  into  Stoic  thought,  and  into  all  Greek  speculation  for 
that  matter,  which  was  destined  to  have  a  great  effect  upon 
subsequent  philosophers,  for  his  thought  was  what  served  as 
the  foundation  upon  which  the  later  theorists  of  asceticism 
built.2 

Posidonius  was  born  at  Apamea,  a  Greek  city  in  Syria, 
about  135  B.C.  While  still  a  boy  he  went  to  Athens  where 
he  studied  philosophy  with  Panaetius  (m.c.  109)  and  others, 
and  then  travelled  extensively,  going  as  far  as  Spain  and 
Upper  Egypt.  He  finally  settled  in  Rhodes,  of  which  city 
he  became  a  citizen,  and  there  taught  philosophy  during  the 
remainder  of  his  life.  Ancient  authors  refer  to  twenty- 
four  books  said  to  have  been  written  by  him,  but  of  these  only 
a  few  fragments  remain,3  largely  preserved  in  the  writings  of 
his  personal  friend  Cicero.  We  do  not  know  the  details 
of  his  doctrines,  therefore,  but  we  do  know  that  these  doctrines 
had  an  enormous  influence  upon  subsequent  writers,  Cicero, 
Seneca,  Varro,  Philo  of  Alexandria,  Plutarch  and  others. 
But  throughout,  Posidonius's  originality  was  slight;  he  did 
not  invent  the  ideas  which  he  set  forth,  but  collected  them. 
For  this  reason,  some  take  "Posidonius"  as  the  name  of  a 
body  of  ideas  then  current,  of  a  tradition,  rather  than  of  a 
person.4 

Having  been  a  Syrian  by  birth,  Posidonius  is  believed  by 
some  to  have  been  influential  in  introducing  a  stream  of 
oriental  mysticism  into  Greek  thought.  It  is  undeniable  that 

2  The  best  modern  accounts  of  Posidonius  are  in  Schmekel,  Philosophic 
der  mittleren  Stoa  (1892)  esp.  pp.  238-90,  and  Bevan,  Stoics  and 
Sceptics  (1913),  ch.  iii. 

zPosidonn  Shodii  reliquae  doctrinae,  ed.  Bake,  1810. 

*  Bevan,  p.  96. 


107 

just  such  a  mysticism  did  begin  to  appear  in  occidental  specu- 
lation at  this  time,  and  it  is  also  certain  that  Posidonius' s 
thought  contained  many  mystical  elements,5  but  it  cannot  be 
proved  that  these  were  of  oriental  origin :  they  might  equally 
well  have  been  derived  from  Plato.  Posidonius  left  his 
oriental  home  while  still  a  boy,  so  he  had  probably  not  pene- 
trated deeply  into  the  wisdom  of  his  country,  while  it  is 
known  that  his  thought  was  in  other  respects  profoundly 
influenced  by  Plato.  But  whatever  its  source  may  have 
been,  it  is  clear  that  a  considerable  amount  of  mysticism  was 
introduced  into  Stoicism  at  this  time,  so  if  we  take  the  word 
Posidonius  in  the  very  broad  sense  of  a  tradition  then  cur- 
rent, oriental  influences  may  have  been  an  important  factor, 
even  though  most  of  the  tradition  came  from  Greek  prede- 
cessors. It  is  this  mysticism  which  makes  the  period  im- 
portant for  the  student  of  asceticism,  for  mysticism  and 
asceticism  are  always  kindred  things,  appealing  to  the  same 
type  of  mind. 

It  is  impossible  to  find  any  direct  teaching  about  asceticism 
in  the  fragments  of  Posidonius ;  his  importance  rather  lies  in 
the  fact  that  he  formulated  a  theory  of  the  world  and  its 
nature  which  was  generally  accepted  by  later  thinkers.  As 
they  made  it  the  foundation  of  their  more  strictly  ascetical 
speculation,  a  brief  description  of  it  is  required  here. 

Posidonius  varied  to  a  certain  extent  from  the  strict 
monism  of  the  earlier  Stoics  by  dividing  all  things  into  two 
categories,  things  with  bodies  and  things  without  bodies, 
matter  and  spirit.  However,  both  were  derived  from  an 
original  being,  a  sort  of  fiery  breath,  the  giver  of  life  and 
reason,  eternal  and  divine.  This  divided  into  spirit  and 
matter.  The  former  was  supposed  to  be  infused  throughout 
the  latter,  giving  it  form  and  life.  The  conventional  Greek 
division  of  things  into  four  elements,  earth,  air,  fire  and 
water,  was  accepted.  The  elements  were  supposed  to  be 

eSchmekel,  pp.  4QOff. 


108 

arranged  in  the  order  of  their  density,  with  earth  at  the 
center,  surrounded  by  water,  then  by  air,  and  finally  by  the 
fire  outside  of  all.  Thus  the  one  farthest  from  the  earth  was 
the  purest  and  the  least  deviated  from  its  divine  origin.  As 
was  said,  spirit  was  to  be  found  in  all  sorts  of  matter ;  every- 
thing was  alive;  the  world  itself  had  a  soul;  but  this  was 
especially  true  of  plants,  still  truer  of  animals,  and  above  all 
the  case  with  men.  The  dual  nature  of  man  was  so  marked 
that  he  was  in  a  class  by  himself,  far  above  animals,  and 
even  resembling  the  divine,  because  of  the  unusual  quality  of 
his  soul.  Men's  souls  were  of  the  same  nature  as  the 
divinity,6  an  ether ial  breath;7  they  were  therefore  in  sharp 
contradistinction  to  the  body,  which  was  but  matter,  and 
useless  and  rotten  flesh,8  the  support,  however,  of  the  God 
dwelling  in  man.9  The  body  was  therefore  only  a  chain  for 
the  soul  which  hindered  and  impeded  its  free  movement.10 
The  soul  was  really  independent  of  the  body,  having  existed 
before  it  and  having  come  to  it  for  the  time  being,  and  would 
undoubtedly  continue  to  exist  after  it.11  From  this  followed 
his  rule  of  ethics:  each  part  of  man  should  (following  the 
Cynic-Stoic  dictum)  live  according  to  nature,  which  might 
be  reduced  to  saying  that  man  should  seek  the  true  and  the 
good,  the  truth  as  the  end  of  the  activity  of  the  spirit,  the 
good  that  of  the  body;12  these  two  made  up  virtue.  But 
owing  to  the  superior  quality  of  spirit,  its  activity  was  con- 
sidered superior  too :  in  the  final  analysis,  the  really  virtuous 
man  was  the  sage.  This  briefly  is  the  theory  of  the  nature  of 
the  world  and  man  which  is  behind  most  of  the  thought  of 
Greek  thinkers  who  came  after  Posidonius. 

e  Cic.  Tusc.  I  24,  56-28,  70. 
7/Znd.  1  17,  40;  18,  42. 
s  Sen.  Ep.  92,  10. 
»  Cic.  Nat.  Deor.  II  9,  24ff. 

10  Cic.  Div.  I  49,  110. 

11  Cic.  Tusc.  I  12,  27ff.;  22,  53ff. 

12  Clem.  Al.  Strom.  II  416b. 


109 

II.  The  best  illustration  of  what  the  Stoics  thought  about 
asceticism  in  the  first  years  of  the  Empire  is  found  in  Seneca ; 
he  is  typical  of  the  time,  giving  in  a  concentrated  form  the 
essence  of  the  Stoicism  which  was  the  prevailing  philosophy 
of  his  day.  Just  as  Nero's  household,  of  which  he  was  an 
inmate,  demonstrated  in  a  concentrated  form  the  tendencies 
which  were  prevailing  in  the  whole  Roman  Empire  and  which 
were  already  heading  it  towards  ruin  (though  moralizing 
historians  since  the  days  of  Tacitus  may  have  exaggerated 
the  vice  of  Nero's  court),  so  the  philosophy  of  Seneca,  which 
was  his  reaction  to  the  life  at  court,  represented  in  a  con- 
centrated form  the  philosophical  ideas  which  prevailed  among 
large  classes  of  persons  throughout  the  world,  and  which  gave 
the  age  its  general  tone.  It  is  certain  that  the  type  of 
thought  which  Seneca  represents  was  popular  throughout  the 
Roman  Empire  at  the  time,  so  his  asceticism  may  be  taken 
as  typical  of  the  ascetic  tendencies  of  the  period. 

Seneca  was  born  at  Cordova,  in  Spain,  practically  at  the 
opening  of  the  Christian  era.  In  the  reign  of  Augustus  his 
father  came  to  Rome  as  a  rhetor.  During  his  early  life, 
Seneca  held  several  public  offices,  but  in  41  A.D.  he  was 
banished  to  Corsica,  where  he  remained  for  eight  years.  At 
length  he  was  recalled,  however,  in  49,  by  the  Empress 
Agrippina,  who  made  him  the  tutor  of  her  son  Nero.  Upon 
the  ascension  of  the  latter  upon  the  throne  of  the  Empire, 
Seneca  and  his  colleague  Burrus  virtually  ruled  the  world. 
For  a  while,  all  went  well.  But  presently  things  changed, 
and  began  to  grow  rapidly  worse,  and  Seneca  wished  to  with- 
draw from  court.  He  had  amassed  an  enormous  fortune, 
which  became  a  scandal  to  others,  and  Seneca  felt  the  reproach 
deeply.  He  wished  to  give  it  up,  but  Nero  forbade  him 
either  to  resign  his  wealth  or  to  leave  Rome.  From  that 
time  on,  his  life  lay  in  Nero's  hands,  as  Seneca  was  perfectly 
well  aware.  He  devoted  himself  during  the  remainder  of 
his  life  to  literary  pursuits:  among  the  various  products  of 


110 

the  time  are  his  letters  to  Luculus,  which  contain  the  best 
exposition  of  his  philosophy,  and  particularly  of  its  ascetical 
features.  At  length  the  order  came,  and  Seneca  committed 
suicide  in  the  year  66. 13 

From  his  youth  upwards,  Seneca  had  received  philosophical 
instruction.  In  one  of  his  letters  to  Luculus,  in  a  passage 
quoted  in  the  last  chapter,  he  tells  in  detail  of  his  early 
studies.  In  this  passage  he  describes  his  rigorous  mode  of 
life,  his  abstinence  from  all  delicacies  which  might  tend  to 
soften  the  body,  and  from  all  fresh  food,  and  in  general,  shows 
himself  an  enthusiastic  adept  of  the  popular  philosophy  of 
the  time.  If  as  a  youth  Seneca  received  such  instruction 
with  enthusiasm,  it  is  no  wonder  that  in  his  old  age  he  gave 
asceticism  a  considerable  place  in  his  philosophy.  But  as 
with  preceding  ascetical  philosophers,  his  asceticism  was 
an  integral  part  of  his  philosophy,  and  a  logical  deduction 
from  its  basic  propositions,  so  it  cannot  be  adequately  under- 
stood apart  from  the  rest. 

The  starting  point  of  his  philosophy — and  of  all  the  other 
philosophies  of  the  time,  for  that  matter,  as  was  but  natural- 
was  a  consideration  of  the  transitoriness  and  uncertainty  of 
all  things.  There  seemed  to  be  nothing  in  the  world  in  which 
a  man  could  have  confidence.  Even  if  things  appear  for  the 
moment  to  be  calm,  he  argued,  one  never  knows  what  will 
come  next:  "do  not  trust  this  tranquility,"  he  warned 
Luculus,  "  the  sea  is  changed  in  a  moment."14  ISTor  is  human 
nature  itself  any  more  certain:  "we  waver  between  various 
plans;  we  wish  nothing  freely,  nothing  absolutely,  nothing 
always.  '  It  is  folly/  you  say,  '  to  which  nothing  is  constant, 
and  is  pleased  long  with  nothing.'  "15  In  such  a  state  of 
affairs,  a  remedy  must  be  sought,  to  make  life  bearable :  since 

is  For  the  relation  of  Seneca 's  philosophy  to  his  times,  see  Glover,  The 
Conflict  of  Religions  in  the  Roman  Empire  (1909),  ch.  ii;  cf.  Dill, 
Roman  Society  from  Nero  to  Marcus  Aurelius,  Bk.  3,  ch.  i. 

i*  Ep.  4,  7. 

is  Ep.  52,  1. 


Ill 

all  the  things  in  this  world  are  transitory,  "  seek  something 
more  amenable  to  the  good ;  but  there  is  nothing  that  is  this 
except  what  the  soul  finds  within  itself;  virtue  alone  offers 
a  sure  and  eternal  pleasure."16  In  this  sentence  is  the 
essence  of  his  whole  philosophy:  to  attain  happiness,  one 
should  forsake  external  things  and  seek  the  things  of  the 
soul,  or  virtue,  for  they  alone  are  eternal.  "Do  not  take 
pleasure  in  vain  things:  I  said  this  was  the  foundation  of 
philosophy :  it  is  its  apex."17  "  ISTo  one  is  able  to  live  securely 
who  thinks  too  much  of  procuring  things,  who  counts  many 
years  among  good  things ;  meditate  daily  how  you  may  leave 
life  with  a  calm  mind."18  "Philosophy  will  persuade  you 
not  to  sit  at  the  counting  desk."19  In  one  place  he  says, 
"  If  you  wish  to  have  your  soul  free,  you  must  be  poor,  or  as 
though  you  were  poor."20  But  it  is  not  necessary  to  live 
in  penury;  it  is  enough  to  be  " as  though  you  were  poor." 
In  another  passage,  he  says  that  one  should  have  sufficient  to 
live :  "  '  what  is  the  measure  of  riches  ? '  you  ask :  first  to  have 
what  is  necessary,  then  to  have  what  is  sufficient."21  All 
that  he  means  to  say  is  that  one  should  not  attach  himself 
to  these  external  things.  Among  these  things  to  which  a 
wise  man  will  not  attach  himself  is  life  itself :  "  I  advise  you 
this,  not  only  as  a  remedy  for  disease  but  also  for  all  life: 
despise  death.  Nothing  is  sad  when  we  have  fled  this  fear."22 
The  gods  have  no  use  for  external  things,  so  why  should  the 
sage  ?23  He  will  care  only  for  virtue,  and  what  is  virtuous, 
even  though  it  be  painful,  is  what  he  will  seek  and  all  that  he 
will  seek.24 

ie  Ep.  27,  3. 
IT  Ep.  23,  1. 
is  Ep.  4,  4. 
i»  Ep.  17,  2. 

20  Ep.  17,  5. 

21  Ep.  2,  6. 

22  Ep.  78,  5. 

23  Ep.  76,  25. 

.  71,21. 


112 

These  ideas  were  all  based  upon  the  old  Cynic  teaching 
that  one  should  forswear  the  goods  of  civilization  and  live 
according  to  nature :  "  indeed,  it  is  our  purpose  to  live  accord- 
ing to  nature/'  said  Seneca.25  If  one  has  this  determination, 
and  also  has,  as  the  Stoics  did  have,  a  clear  conception  of  the 
necessity  of  nature,  he  will  always  wish  to  act  in  harmony 
with  it :  "  the  wise  man  does  nothing  unwillingly ;  he  escapes 
necessity,  for  he  desires  what  is  necessary."26  Parallel  with 
this,  or  rather,  as  a  consequence  of  it,  was  the  great  emphasis 
which  was  placed  upon  reason.  "  If  you  wish  to  submit  all 
things  to  yourself,  submit  yourself  to  reason;  you  will  rule 
many  things  if  reason  rules  you."27  But  this  reasonable- 
ness is  not  only  practical:  reason  being  the  highest  part  of 
man,  its  perfection  is  the  highest  perfection.  "  It  is  well  if 
the  reason  is  set  free  and  right,  and  accommodates  the  will 
to  its  nature.  For  as  reason  alone  perfects  a  man,  so  perfect 
reason  alone  makes  him  happy."28  "You  rejoice  that  you 
are  improving  and  calm;  yet  that  joy  is  a  very  different  one 
which  comes  from  the  contemplation  of  a  resplendent  mind, 
pure  from  all  defilement."29  But  reason  is  more  than  the 
highest  part  of  man:  it  is  an  element  of  the  divine  within 
him.  "Reason  is  nothing  other  than  a  part  of  the  divine 
spirit  placed  in  the  human  body."30  Thus  reappears  the  old 
Stoic  doctrine  of  the  Spermatic  Logos  and  its  incarnation 
in  man. 

This  importance  of  reason  led  to  a  great  emphasis  upon 
the  personality  or  individuality  of  a  man,  upon  his  soul. 
Since  reason  was  considered  the  most  important  part  of  man, 
and  was  internal,  and  since  all  external  things  were  vain, 
men  were  urged  to  rely  upon  their  own  souls,  to  withdraw 

25  Ep.  5,  4. 

26  Ep.  54,  7. 

27  Ep.  37,  4. 

28  Ep.  76, 15-16. 

29  Ep.  4,  1. 

30  Ep.  66,  12. 


113 

within  themselves.  "  Withdraw  into  yourself  as  much  as  you 
are  able;  commune  with  those  things  which  will  make  you 
better."31  Also,  it  was  taught  that  a  man  should  be  judged 
by  these  internal  things  only :  "  when  you  wish  to  arrive  at  a 
true  estimation  of  a  man,  and  to  know  what  sort  he  is,  regard 
him  naked :  let  him  set  aside  his  inheritance,  his  honors  and 
the  other  lies  of  nature,  and  let  him  divest  himself  of  his 
body  itself :  regard  the  soul,  as  to  what  sort  and  how  great  it 
is,  and  whether  its  greatness  is  due  to  him  or  someone  else."32 
Corollary  with  this  was  the  teaching  that  a  man  should  show 
himself  independent  even  of  other  men :  the  greatest  contempt 
is  shown  for  the  iurba.  It  is  said  to  be  the  incarnation  of 
foolishness  and  vice.  The  sage  will  flee  it.33 

The  reward  which  awaits  him  who  does  this  is  freedom, 
"  perpetual  liberty,  and  dread  (timor)  of  neither  man  nor 
god."34  In  a  splendid  passage,  Seneca  speaks  of  the  reward 
which  a  sage  may  expect,  and  in  it,  he  sums  up  a  good  deal 
of  his  philosophy.  "  And  how  great  a  recompense  awaits,  if 
we  break  off  from  our  preoccupations  and  most  tenacious 
evils.  Neither  passion  nor  fear  disturbs  us.  Unmoved  by 
terrors,  uncorrupted  by  vices,  we  shall  dread  neither  death 
nor  the  gods :  we  shall  know  that  death  is  not  an  evil  and  that 
the  gods  are  not  bad:  for  that  is  weak  which  harms,  rather 
than  that  which  is  harmed.  The  best  lack  evil  power. 
There  awaits  us,  if  hereafter  we  go  from  this  debased  to  that 
lofty  state,  tranquility  of  soul  and,  after  all  delusions  have 
been  expelled,  absolute  liberty.  Do  you  ask  what  these 
mean?  Not  to  dread  either  men  or  gods;  to  wish  nothing 
base  or  superfluous;  to  have  the  greatest  power  in  oneself: 
for  it  is  an  inestimable  good  to  be  made  master  of  oneself."35 

si  Ep.  7,  8. 

32  Ep.  76,  32. 

MEp.7,  1,  2;  8}  1,  2;  de  Otio  8,  1. 

s*  Ep.  17,  6. 

35  Ep.  75, 16-18. 

9 


114 

Upon  this  foundation,  teaching  the  vanity  of  all  external 
things,  and  exalting  to  the  skies  the  gloriousness  of  the 
individual  soul,  Seneca's  asceticism  was  built.  The  end 
of  life,  he  taught,  is  virtue,  but  few  men  ever  attain  it.  His 
ascetical  philosophy  aimed  to  point  out  the  way  which  one 
should  follow  to  attain  it. 

In  the  first  place,  all  men  are  sinners:  " peccavimus"  he 
says.36  But  though  this  statement  may  be  enlightening,  it 
does  not  aid  greatly  in  remedying  the  situation,  except  in  so 
far  as  it  emphasizes  the  fact  that  there  is  a  situation  to  be 
remedied.  It  is  more  important  to  know  why  all  men  are 
sinners.  "What  is  it,  Luculus,"  he  asks, " which  drags  us  one 
way  when  we  want  to  go  another,  and  forces  us  towards  that 
from  which  we  wish  to  recede  ?  "37  The  answer  is  that 
"  many  things  bind  us,  many  things  maim  us.  As  long  as  we 
are  buried  in  vices,  it  is  difficult  to  be  saved.  We  are  not 
impure,  but  poisoned."38  The  real  cause  of  sin  is  that  men 
do  not  realize  the  vanity  of  everything,  but  are  constantly 
wanting  things;  in  good  Buddhist  fashion,  he  teaches  that 
desire  is  the  root  of  all  evil:  he  quotes  with  approval  from 
Hecaton,  "you  will  cease  fearing  if  you  cease  desiring."39 
The  trouble  with  men  is  that  they  do  not  heed  the  teaching  of 
philosophy. 

The  life  which  a  philosopher  should  lead,  and  the  one  led 
by  ordinary  people  are  two  absolutely  incompatible  modes  of 
life;  in  the  manner  of  so  many  of  his  contemporaries,  he 
compares  them  to  two  cities.40  One  is  the  ordinary  every- 
day world  of  transitoriness  and  discord  and  sordidness ;  the 
other  the  real  and  spiritual  world.  He  urges  his  friend 
Luculus  to  "  ascend  from  this  world  to  that."  "  As  great  as 
is  the  difference  between  their  splendor  and  light — and  one 

se  de  Clem,  i  6. 
37  Ep.  52,  1. 
ss  Ep.  59,  9. 
39  Ep.  5,  7. 

.  68,  2;  de  Otio  iv. 


115 

has  its  own  certain  source  of  light,  but  the  other  shines  by  the 
light  of  the  first — so  great  is  the  difference  between  this  life 
and  that :  the  present  one  is  illuminated  by  light  coming  from 
without  and  whoever  comes  makes  a  thick  shadow ;  that  one 
is  illuminated  by  its  own  light.7'41 

This  other  life  is  the  one  which  every  man,  or  at  least 
every  philosopher,  should  seek  to  lead ;  this  other  city  is  the 
one  in  which  he  should  seek  to  establish  his  true  citizenship. 
But  this  is  by  no  means  an  easy  task:  it  requires  constant 
struggle  and  warfare  on  the  part  of  the  philosopher.  "It 
would  make  you  laugh  if  someone  should  tell  you  that  the 
struggle  is  gentle  and  easy.  I  do  not  wish  to  deceive  you. 
The  expression  is  the  same  for  this  most  glorious  profession, 
and  that  most  base  one  [of  gladiator]  :  '  to  practice  (usi  = 
acr/celv),  to  conquer  and  to  be  slain  by  the  sword.7  It  might 
better  be  avoided  by  those  who  place  themselves  in  the  arena, 
and  who  eat  and  drink  what  they  gain  by  blood,  for  they  suffer 
such  things  unwillingly ;  but  when  said  by  you,  it  is  not  base, 
for  you  endure  willingly  and  freely.  They  are  allowed  to  throw 
down  their  arms  and  demand  mercy  of  the  people,  but  you  may 
neither  surrender  nor  ask  for  your  life.'742  The  life  of  the 
philosopher  is  like  that  of  the  soldier,  and  both  should  be 
terminated  with  the  word  "  Vici ! 77  "  Do  you  ask  whom  you 
are  to  conquer?  ~Not  the  Persians  nor  the  farthest  of  the 
Medes  nor  whatever  warlike  people  lies  beyond  the  Dahae, 
but  avarice,  ambition  and  fear  of  the  death  which  conquers 
the  conquerors  of  peoples.7743  He  bids  men  endure  the  buf- 
ferings of  fate  by  remembering  that  "no  athlete  is  able  to 
approach  the  struggle  who  has  never  been  beaten  black  and 
blue.7744  One  of  his  arguments  for  a  rigorous  mode  of  life 
is  that  "  the  strongest  soldiers  come  from  the  rough  country, 
while  the  lazy  ones  come  from  the  city.  The  more  severe 

41  Ep.  21,  1-2. 

42  £p.  37,  1-2;  cf.  96,  5. 

43  Ep.  71,  37. 

44  Ep.  13,  2. 


116 

discipline  of  the  country  strengthens  their  nature,  and  makes 
it  suitable  for  greater  endeavours."45  Finally,  no  one  is  able 
to  attain  the  good  things  which  lead  to  a  happy  life  unless 
"  one  is  regardless  of  labor,"  but  if  one  does  persevere,  he  will 
at  last  succeed,  and  receive  a  reward  which  is  comparable  to 
a  victor's  crown.46 

To  attain  this  crown,  the  essential  thing  is  to  cultivate  virtue 
and  flee  from  vice.  Now,  like  the  good  ascetic  that  he  is,  and 
like  the  faithful  descendant  of  the  Greek  tradition  that  he  also 
is,  Seneca  associates  the  former  with  the  internal  and  invisible 
soul,  and  the  latter  with  the  external  and  visible  body.  Thus 
he  arrives  at  the  distinction  of  soul  and  body,  with  the  cor- 
ollary doctrine  of  the  infinite  superiority  of  the  former:  he 
who  would  seek  virtue,  and  he  who  would  sin  no  more,  must 
cease  caring  for  the  body. 

In  a  number  of  passages,  Seneca  points  out  the  baseness  of 
the  body.  "  Leave  the  body,  as  something  rotten."47  "  It  is 
useless  and  decaying  flesh,  good  only  for  receiving  food,  as 
Posidonius  said."48  "Restrain  your  body  as  much  as  you 
are  able,  and  give  the  place  to  the  soul."49  "  The  body  is  to 
be  treated  severely,  lest  the  soul  perish  miserably."50  He 
speaks  of  the  body  as  "  corpusculum,"  and  says  that  "  even  if 
nothing  can  be  done  without  it,  consider  it  a  necessary  thing 
rather  than  a  great  one."51  It  is  able  to  and  does  make  life 
miserable,52  and  is  a  punishment.53  "  The  body  is  a  burden 
to  the  soul  and  a  punishment ;  the  soul  is  constantly  distressed 
by  it  and  in  its  chains,"54  a  doctrine  familiar  since  the 

45  Ep.  51,  10-11. 

46  Ep.  78,  16,  4. 

47  Ep.  120, 17. 

48  Ep.  92, 10. 
40  Ep.  15,  2. 
5Q  Ep.  8,  5. 
si  Ep.  22,  6. 

52  Ep.  22,  3. 

53  Ep.  120, 14. 

54  Ep.  65, 16. 


117 

advent  of  Orphism,  but  which  Seneca  undoubtedly  took  from 
Plato.  "  This  little  body  is  a  jailer  and  chain  for  the  soul.'755 
"  These  bones  which  you  see  thrown  about  us,  and  the  nerves 
and  the  skin  stretched  over  them,  and  the  face  and  hands  and 
the  other  things  in  which  we  are  enclosed,  are  chains  and 
shadows  of  the  soul.  The  soul  is  buried  in  them,  it  is  choked, 
slain,  turned  from  the  truth  and  driven  into  falsity  by  them. 
All  life  is  a  bitter  struggle  with  this  flesh."56  But  Seneca 
remembers  all  the  while  that  the  body  is  a  necessary  thing, 
and  says  that  one  "  may  indulge  the  body  as  much  as  is  neces- 
sary for  good  health."57  "  I  admit  that  a  care  for  our  bodies 
is  laid  upon  us ;  I  admit  that  we  have  a  wardship  over  them. 
I  do  not  say  that  the  body  is  not  to  be  cared  for ;  I  deny  that 
it  is  to  be  served.  For  he  serves  many  things  who  serves  the 
body,  who  fears  it  too  much,  who  refers  all  things  to  it.  If 
it  is  necessary  for  us  to  care  for  it,  it  is  not  that  we  should 
live  for  the  sake  of  the  body,  but  that  we  cannot  live  without 
it.  Love  of  it  disturbs  us  with  fears,  burdens  us  with  cares, 
exposes  us  to  injury.  Honor  is  base  to  him  to  whom  the  body 
is  too  dear.  We  should  most  diligently  control  our  concern 
for  it,  so  that  if  reason  demands,  or  dignity  or  honesty,  we 
may  consign  it  to  the  flames."58  The  body  is  therefore  what 
is  really  at  the  bottom  of  all  our  troubles,  and  we  would  be 
better  off  without  it:  "if  souls  only  remained  free  from 
bodies,  their  state  would  be  happier  than  when  they  are  in 
them."59 

But  the  body,  while  being  the  chief  source  of  evil,  is  not 
the  only  one.  At  other  times  he  attributes  wickedness  to  the 
things  of  the  world,  and  particularly  what  he  calls  the 
"  crowd  " :  his  contempt  for  this  has  already  been  mentioned, 
but  he  did  not  stop  at  contempt,  but  went  on  to  teach  that  it 

55  Dial,  xii  11,  7. 

56  Dial,  vi  24,  5. 

57  Ep.  8,  5. 

58  Ep.  14, 1-2. 

59  Ep.  76, 25. 


118 

was  inherently  wicked.  "  Do  you  inquire  what  I  think  you 
should  particularly  avoid  ?  The  crowd.  Conversation  with 
many  is  hurtful ;  there  is  no  one  who  will  not  commend  some 
vice  or  press  it  upon  you,  or  color  it  over  for  you  unawares. 
Therefore  the  greater  the  number  of  people  we  are  associated 
with,  the  greater  is  our  danger."60  But  the  "  crowd  "  is  not 
the  only  thing  either:  from  every  quarter  come  temptations 
which  seek  to  destroy  us.  "  We  should  therefore  direct  our 
course  so  that  we  may  be  able  to  flee  as  far  as  possible  from 
inducements  to  vice.  The  soul  is  to  be  toughened  and  with- 
drawn far  from  the  allurements  of  pleasure.  One  winter 
undid  Hannibal,  and  the  delicacies  of  Campania  effeminated 
the  man  unconquered  by  the  snows  of  the  Alps.  He  con- 
quered with  arms,  but  was  conquered  by  vices.7'61  A  par- 
ticular source  of  temptation  he  saw  in  the  theater,  which  he, 
like  Plato,  condemned  as  subversive  of  good  morals.  "  Really 
there  is  nothing  so  destructive  to  good  morals  as  to  sit  in 
some  theater.  Because  of  the  spectacle,  vices  break  forth 
more  easily."62 

It  was  an  orthodox  Stoic  doctrine  that  the  sage  is  superior 
to  external  circumstances,  for  he  will  rise  above  them.  Thus 
"  Canopus  does  not  prevent  any  one  from  being  good,  nor  does 
Baia  itself."63  Nevertheless,  discretion  is  sometimes  the  bet- 
ter part  of  valor,  and  it  is  consequently  desirable  to  flee 
temptation,  as  was  shown  in  the  quotations  in  the  preceding 
paragraph:  a  philosophic  retreat  is  urged,  and  he  remarks 
that  "no  one  thinking  of  a  retreat  would  ever  choose  Cano- 
pus."64 In  several  of  his  letters  he  expatiates  upon  the 
advantages  of  a  retreat  from  the  world  and  its  justifications. 
"  I  approve  of  your  plan :  conceal  yourself  in  ease — but  also 
flee  ease  itself.  If  this  is  not  to  be  justified  from  the  prin- 

co  Ep.  7, 1-2. 
si  Ep.  51, 5-6. 

62  Ep.  7,  2. 

63  Ep.  51,  3. 

64  Ep.  51,  3. 


119 

ciples  of  the  Stoics,  you  know  that  at  least  it  is  permitted 
from  their  example.  But  you  may  also  do  this  according  to 
their  precepts;  you  will  be  approved  both  by  yourself  and 
whomever  you  wish.  We  should  not  concern  ourselves  with 
every  matter,  nor  always  nor  unlimitedly.  Moreover,  as  we 
Stoics  give  the  wise  man  a  commonwealth  worthy  of  him,  that 
is,  the  universe,  he  is  not  beyond  public  matters,  even  if  he 
goes  into  retreat ;  but  on  the  contrary,  if  only  a  small  corner 
is  left  for  him,  it  being  placed  in  the  heavens,  he  knows  that 
he  is  in  a  greater  place  than  before,  when  he  ascended  to  the 
magistrate's  seat  or  the  tribunal,  or  when  he  sat  in  a  humble 
place."65  "Do  you  ask  me  what  pleases  me  most  of  those 
things  which  I  hear  about  you  ?  It  is  when  I  hear  nothing 
at  all,  and  when  many  of  those  whom  I  question  do  not  know 
what  you  are  doing.  It  is  a  good  thing  to  have  nothing  to 
do  with  different  persons,  and  those  desiring  different  things. 
...  I  am  not  afraid  that  they  may  change  you,  but  that  they 
may  impede  you."66  " '  You  order  me  to  avoid  the  crowd  ? ' 
you  ask,  '  and  to  go  into  retreat  ?  Where,  then,  are  your  pre- 
cepts which  say  that  we  should  die  in  action  ? '  Well,  what  I 
seem  to  urge  upon  you,  I  perform  myself,  withdrawing  and 
closing  my  doors,  in  order  that  I  may  be  able  to  advance  as 
much  as  possible.  ...  I  withdraw  not  so  much  from  men 
as  from  things,  and  particularly  from  my  own  things :  I  work 
for  posterity."67 

This  mere  withdrawal  from  worldly  affairs,  however,  was 
not  all.  Sometimes  he  made  it  include  a  life  of  ascetic  dis- 
cipline, at  least  upon  certain  days.  "  I  should  like  to  tempt 
the  strength  of  your  soul  in  another  way,"  he  wrote  toLuculus, 
"  and  teach  you  something  from  the  precepts  of  great  men. 
Set  apart  certain  days,  upon  which  to  be  content  with  very 
little  and  vile  food,  and  with  rough  and  prickly  clothing,  so 
that  you  can  say  to  yourself,  l  Is  this  what  was  feared  ? '  In 

tsEp.  68,  1-2;  cf.  36,  1. 
66  Ep.  32,  2. 
«7  Ep.  8, 1-2. 


120 

its  present  security,  the  mind  thus  prepares  itself  for  diffi- 
culties, and  in  the  midst  of  benefits,  strengthens  itself  against 
the  injuries  of  fortune."68  The  justification  here  is  as 
typical  as  the  act  justified. 

Thus  certain  austerities  are  recommended  as  a  valuable 
training.  But  Seneca  was  unwilling  to  recommend  the  ex- 
cesses to  which  many  persons  were  going  in  his  day.  "  I 
warn  you  lest,  after  the  manner  of  those  who  do  not  desire 
to  progress  but  to  be  seen,  you  might  do  some  things  which 
would  make  your  costume  or  manner  of  life  notable.  Avoid 
a  cultivated  filth,  an  unshorn  head,  a  more  neglected  beard, 
an  advertised  contempt  for  money,  a  bed  on  the  ground,  and 
whatever  else  ambition  seeks  by  a  perverse  way.  ...  It  is 
contrary  to  nature  to  rack  the  body,  to  hate  an  easy  cleanli- 
ness, to  seek  filth,  and  to  use  food  which  is  not  so  much  cheap 
as  offensive  and  horrid.  .  .  .  Philosophy  demands  temper- 
ance, not  punishment,  and  there  may  be  a  decency  of  tem- 
perance. .  .  .  He  is  great  who  uses  clay  in  the  same  way  as 
silver,  nor  is  he  less  great  who  uses  silver  as  though  it  were 
clay."69  Going  further,  he  was  disgusted  by  the  mutilations 
with  which  some  zealots  deformed  themselves ;  "  daily  they 
contrive  means  by  which  injury  may  be  done  to  virility,  while 
others  cut  off  their  genitals."70 

All  the  propositions  which  are  fundamental  to  asceticism 
are  to  be  found,  therefore,  in  Seneca :  the  body  is  bad  and  to 
be  suppressed,  the  world  is  the  source  of  temptations  and  to 
be  fled,  austerities  are  to  be  indulged  in  as  training.  In  all 
of  this,  Seneca  was  following  the  spirit  of  his  time,  and 
rationalizing  what  multitudes  of  persons  were  then  doing, 
as  was  seen  in  the  last  chapter.  He  began  his  philosophic 
career,  as  was  seen,  by  eagerly  practicing  this  popular  asceti- 
cism: his  importance  for  the  present  study  lies  in  the  fact 
that  in  later  life  he  developed  from  this  the  philosophy  of 

es  Ep.  18, 5. 
69^.5,1,2,4,5,6. 
TO  Nat.  Ques.  vii  31,  3. 


121 

asceticism  which  has  just  been  outlined,  and  thus  stated  the 
aspiration  of  the  time  in  enduring  words.  He  formulated  a 
view  of  life  which  made  asceticism  seem  reasonable  and  de- 
sirable, and  which  was  destined  to  the  greatest  influence  in 
subsequent  history.  The  Christians  found  this  view  of  life 
so  congenial  that  they  were  unwilling  to  believe  that  its  au- 
thor was  unacquainted  with  the  Gospel,  so  forged  a  corre- 
spondence between  him  and  St.  Paul  which  even  deceived 
Jerome  and  Augustine.  And  the  sum  and  substance  of  this 
world-view  was  that  the  world  itself  is  fleeting  and  not  to  be 
counted  upon,  and  that  the  soul  alone  is  stable  and  worthy  of 
the  care  of  a  wise  man ;  that  the  body  and  all  else  which  inter- 
feres with  the  soul  is  to  be  shunned,  or  to  receive  as  little 
attention  as  possible ;  and  that  the  really  great  man  is  the  one 
who  neglects  all  for  the  cultivation  of  his  soul.  "  Believe  me, 
those  who  seem  to  do  nothing  are  really  doing  the  greatest 
things:  they  have  to  do  at  the  same  time  with  human  things 
and  divine."71 

III.  If  the  attempt  were  being  made  here  to  give  a  com- 
plete account  of  the  asceticism  of  all  the  philosophical  writers 
who  later  had  an  influence  upon  Christian  ascetics,  consider- 
able space  would  have  to  be  devoted  at  this  point  to  Philo  of 
Alexandria.  For  of  all  the  writers  of  this  period,  Philo 
probably  had  the  greatest  influence  upon  his  Christian  suc- 
cessors,72 and  as  asceticism  plays  a  considerable  role  in  his 
philosophical  system,  it  is  but  natural  that  his  theory  of 
asceticism  should  be  of  equal  importance.  But  as  has  already 
been  pointed  out  several  times,  there  is  no  intention  of  here 
discussing  all  the  forerunners  of  Christian  asceticism;  we 
must  confine  ourselves  to  those  who  are  obviously  in  the  Greek 
tradition,  that  is,  to  those  who  received  the  majority  at  least 
of  their  opinions  from  Greeks,  and  who  passed  theirs  on 

71  Ep.  8,  6. 

72  Conybeare,  Philo  About  the  Contemplative  Life    (1895).    Pp.   x, 
330,  328ff. 


122 

to  later  Greeks.  But  Philo  did  neither  of  these  things;  he 
was  born  and  brought  up  a  Jew  and  received  his  inspiration 
from  the  Jews,  though  he  took  his  material  largely  from  the 
Greeks;  on  the  other  hand,  he  always  remained  unknown  to 
later  Greeks  and  his  influence  upon  them  was  therefore  in- 
significant. Consequently  Philo  was  an  offshoot  from  the 
Greek  tradition,  rather  than  a  part  of  it,  and  outside  the 
proper  field  of  the  present  study.  Nevertheless,  Philo  was  a 
very  typical  representative  of  his  time,  and  parts  of  his  phi- 
losophy represented  what  many  Greeks  were  thinking  at  the 
same  time:  in  spite  of  his  Jewish  origin,  Philo  was  pro- 
foundly affected  by  Greek  speculation.  It  will  not  be  wholly 
out  of  place,  therefore,  to  summarize  his  ascetic  thought 
briefly,  even  though  nowhere  near  the  amount  of  space  is 
devoted  to  it  which  his  influence  upon  Christian  thought 
would  justify,  if  a  general  history  of  asceticism  were  being 
written.73 

In  his  moral  system  particularly,  Philo  was  a  Greek.  He 
had  taken  over  from  the  Stoics  the  idea  of  the  possibility  of 
moral  progress,  but  the  religious  note  in  his  system  was  much 
stronger  than  in  theirs,  for  he  made  the  whole  progress  culmi- 
nate in  an  ecstatic  union  with  God — an  idea  frequently  found 
in  the  later  mystics,  and  especially  Plotinus.  In  his  account 
of  the  different  virtues,  too,  Philo  merely  followed  the  Stoics 
to  a  large  extent.  His  portrait  of  the  ideal  sage,  his  em- 
phasis upon  internal,  spiritual  life  (which  is  the  center  of  his 
moral  system)  and  his  ideas  in  regard  to  human  fraternity 
are  as  Stoical  as  is  his  abundant  use  of  the  allegorical  method. 
But  Philo's  asceticism  seems  to  have  been  taken  from  a  more 
popular  source,  namely,  the  Cynics  and  such  diatribe  writers 
as  Musonius.74  For  him,  as  for  them,  it  was  pleasure,  the 

73  For  an  excellent  account  of  the  moral  system  of  Philo,  see  Brehier, 
Les  Idees  philosophiques  et  religieuses  de  Philon  d'Alexandrie  (1907), 
Bk.  3,  ch.  3,  pp.  250-310;  cf.  Bousset,  Die  Religion  des  Judentums 
(1904),  pp.  503ff.;  Conybeare,  Op.  tit.,  pp.  265ff. 

7*Wendland,  Philo  und  die  Jcynisch-stoische  Diatribe  (1895);  Brehier, 
pp.  261ff. 


123 

chief  evil,  which  was  the  cause  of  the  fall  of  man,  and  of  all 
their  vices  and  passions.  Consequently,  the  most  important 
virtue  was  the  one  which  was  opposed  to  pleasure,  namely, 
temperance  or  continence.  "He  rejects  and  banishes  all 
luxury  from  life;  he  finds  his  ideal  of  life  realized  in  the 
community  of  Therapeutae.  He  regrets  that  the  wise  man 
cannot  destroy  the  desire  for  food,  and  that  human  nature  is 
driven  to  use  food  and  drink."75  He  describes  at  length  the 
internal  combat  in  which  one  should  engage  against  pleasure, 
passions  and  vices.76  Virtue  is  to  be  acquired  only  after  a 
long  series  of  pains  and  efforts,  which  constitutes  a  veritable 
asceticism — both  in  the  original  sense  of  training  and  in  the 
derived  sense  of  abstention.  This  asceticism  consisted  in 
seeking  virtue  and  in  learning  to  despise  false  goods.77  Dif- 
ferent practices  are  recommended  in  different  passages :  read- 
ing, exercise,  practice  of  the  cult,  meditation  upon  the  good, 
the  accomplishment  of  regular  functions.78  But  the  most 
important  things  are  struggle  against  temptation  and  the 
inward  life.  This  latter  sometimes  takes  the  form  of  retire- 
ment from  the  world79 — though  in  general  Philo  disapproved 
of  non-social  hermits80 — and  sometimes  of  interior  medita- 
tion.81 By  such  acts,  one  was  trained  to  live  virtuously,  just 
as  the  gladiator  was  trained  for  the  contest.82  By  means  of 
them,  a  man  might  hope  to  arrive  at  last  at  that  state  for 
which  all  should  struggle,  perfection. 

At  the  same  time  as  Philo  (the  last  years  before  Christ 
and  the  first  after)  came  the  great  revival  of  Pythagorean 
philosophy,  which,  as  we  have  seen,  contained  a  great  deal  of 

75Bousset,  p.  511;  Philo.  Leg.  All.  Ill  141ff. 
i«Leg.  All.  II  79-108;  III  118-160;  etc. 

77  de  cong.  er.  gr.  24-34. 

78  Leg.  All.  I  18 ;  quis  rer.  div.  her.  253. 
7»  de  leg.  spec.  Ill  1;  Bousset,  p.  510. 
so  de  fuga  33ff.;  Brehier,  p.  268. 

si  de  gig.  44. 

82  This  figure,  borrowed  from  the  Cynics,  is  found  frequently  in  Philo. 


124 

asceticism.  Developing  upon  the  number  mysticism  of  the 
earlier  Pythagoreans,  they  taught  that  the  One  was  to  be 
associated  with  God,  and  the  Many  with  Matter,  and  from 
this  they  deduced  philosophical  principles  recommending  the 
subjugation  of  matter  and  a  general  asceticism.  Continuing 
the  old  belief  about  the  transmigration  of  souls,  they  argued 
for  abstention  from  meat;  their  arguments  for  this  are  well 
shown  in  Jamblichus's  work  On  Abstention  from  Animal 
Food.83  But  !N"eo-Pythagoreanism  never  became  a  widely 
accepted  philosophy,  especially  in  its  metaphysical  features. 
Most  of  the  persons  who  interested  themselves  in  it  were  like 
those  who  were  described  in  the  last  chapter,  who  took  it  as 
a  popular  ethical  system.  Its  real  significance  as  a  philoso- 
phy lies  in  the  fact  that  it  prepared  the  way  for  N~eo-Plato- 
nism.  Just  as  centuries  before  Pythagorism  had  led  up  to 
.Platonism,  so  now  the  revised  Pythagorism  led  up  to  a  re- 
vised Platonism. 

IV.  It  has  already  been  shown  how  closely  the  thought  of 
Plato  was  related  to  the  environment  which  produced  it:  as 
a  result  of  the  activity  of  the  sophists  during  the  fifth  century 
B.C.,  the  old  ideals  and  aspirations  of  the  Athenians  had  been 
shattered,  and  their  old  values  reduced  to  nought;  to  some 
minds,  and  especially  to  Plato's,  this  destructive  work  of  the 
sophists  seemed  to  lead  to  ruin,  and  the  mainspring  which 
drove  his  entire  philosophical  activity  was  the  desire  to  show 
that  ideals  do  have  a  real  existence,  in  fact,  a  realer  existence 
than  any  other  things,  and  that  they  are  more  worthy  of  our 
efforts  than  anything  else;  this  was  the  sum  and  substance 
of  the  Platonic  teaching.  But  while  this  destructive  work 
against  which  Plato  revolted  is  generally  laid  to  the  sophists, 
it  was  really  due  to  the  general  evolution  of  the  times,  and  to 
the  political  and  social  situation  of  Athens.  Now,  during 
the  closing  centuries  of  the  history  of  the  pagan  world,  this 

ss  For  a  general  account  of  Neo-Pythagoreanisnij  see  Zeller,  vol.  3,  pt. 
2,  pp.  110-139. 


125 

same  situation  was  repeated.  The  Hellenic  civilization  was 
losing  its  force,  and  again  old  ideals  were  falling  into  decay. 
A  reading  of  Lucian  should  convince  anyone  of  that.  As  the 
present  seemed  unable  to  produce  anything  worth  while,  se- 
rious minds  turned  more  and  more  to  the  past,  and  all  sorts 
of  methods  were  attempted  to  reinstate  the  old  ideals  which 
had  made  possible  the  Greek  civilization.  The  allegorical 
method  of  the  Stoics  is  an  early  example  of  this ;  by  it  they 
attempted  to  make  the  old  myths  and  beliefs  credible  once 
more.  But  as  time  went  on  things  grew  worse,  and  other 
methods  were  tried.  The  last  of  these  was  an  attempted  re- 
vival of  Platonic  philosophy.  It  was  no  wonder  that  the  men 
of  the  third  century  felt  an  especial  attraction  for  Plato, 
for  he  had  faced  a  situation  much  like  theirs ;  they  found  a 
kindred  mind  in  him,  and  the  answers  he  gave  to  the  great 
problems  were  taken  up  with  eagerness  by  these  disciples 
centuries  later.  Hence  the  rise  of  Neo-Platonism.  But  the 
Neo-Platonists  did  not  confine  themselves  to  taking  over 
Plato;  continuing  the  eclecticism  which  had  marked  Greek 
philosophy  for  several  centuries,  they  also  drew  heavily  upon 
Aristotle  and  the  Stoics,  while  their  immediate  source  of 
origin  seems  to  have  been  Neo-Pythagoreanism.  The  influ- 
ence of  oriental  speculation,  and  especially  of  gnosticism,  was 
also  marked.84  In  the  main,  however,  Neo-Platonism  was  a 
continuation  and  revival  of  Platonism. 

The  school  of  the  Neo-Platonists  claimed  Ammonius  Saccas 
as  its  founder.  This  philosopher  flourished  in  Alexandria 
about  the  year  200  A.D.  He  wrote  nothing  himself,  but  in- 
spired a  large  number  of  pupils,  who  perpetuated  the  system 
which  he  had  formulated.  From  his  time  until  the  end  of 
the  Greek  world,  Neo-Platonism  was  the  predominating  phi- 
losophy. During  this  period  the  school  produced  many 
writers,  but  among  these  the  most  eminent  and  the  most 

s*  For  the  question  of  the  relations  of  Neo-Platonism  and  Gnosticism, 
see  C.  Schmidt,  Plotins  Stellung  sum  Gnosticismus  und  kirchlichen  Chris- 
tentum,  Texte  und  Untersuchungen,  N.F.  iv,  1901. 


126 

typical  was  Ammonius's  own  pupil,  Plotinus.  His  Enneads 
are  the  classical  exposition  of  Neo-Platonic  philosophy.  In 
our  search  for  the  ascetic  theory  of  the  school,  we  cannot  do 
better  than  turn  to  them. 

Plotinus  was  born  at  Lykopolis  in  Egypt  in  204  or  205. 
He  early  devoted  himself  to  the  study  of  philosophy  at  Alex- 
andria, where  he  came  in  contact  with  Ammonius.  In  242 
he  set  out  for  Persia  with  the  expedition  of  the  Emperor  Gor- 
dianus,  to  study  the  philosophy  of  the  Persians  and  Hindus ; 
but  as  the  emperor  was  killed  in  Mesopotamia,  the  expedition 
was  a  failure,  and  Plotinus  went  to  Antioch.  Two  years  later 
he  went  to  Rome,  where  he  taught  philosophy  until  his  death 
in  269  or  270. 

His  pupil  and  biographer  Porphyry  tells  us  that  he  was  so 
ashamed  of  having  a  body  that  he  never  spoke  of  his  parents 
who  had  given  him  one.85  In  regard  to  his  own  ascetic  life, 
we  are  told  that  "  he  never  ate  the  flesh  of  domestic  animals, 
much  less  of  wild  ones.  He  never  bathed,  but  contented  him- 
self with  having  his  body  rubbed  every  day ;  when  those  who 
performed  this  office  died  of  a  plague  which  was  then  making 
great  ravages,  he  dispensed  with  this,  too,  which  interruption 
gave  him  quinsy."86  Ascetic  practices  were  common  among 
Plotinus's  pupils,  too.  Thus  Rogotianus,  a  Roman  senator, 
who  applied  himself  to  the  study  of  philosophy  under  Ploti- 
nus, "became  so  detached  from  the  things  of  this  world  that 
he  abandoned  his  property,  dismissed  his  domestics,  and  re- 
nounced his  dignities.  Having  been  named  praetor,  at  the 
moment  of  entering  upon  his  duties,  when  the  lictors  already 
awaited  him,  he  determined  not  to  go  out  or  to  exercise  any  of 
the  functions  of  this  office.  He  was  not  even  willing  to  live 
in  his  house,  but  went  to  his  friends'  houses.  There  he  ate 
and  slept.  He  only  took  food  one  day  in  two,  and  by  this 
regimen,  after  having  been  so  afflicted  with  gout  that  he  had 

.  Vit.  Plot.  1. 


127 

to  be  carried  about  in  a  chair,  lie  regained  his  strength  and 
stretched  out  his  hands  as  easily  as  a  mechanic,  though  he  had 
been  unable  to  make  any  use  of  them  before.  Plotinus  had  a 
great  friendship  for  him;  he  praised  him  highly  and  held 
him  up  as  a  model  to  those  who  wished  to  become  philoso- 
phers."87 But  the  importance  of  Plotinus  is  not  in  what  he 
did,  but  in  what  he  taught.  In  his  essays,  a  theory  of  asceti- 
cism is  developed  which  represents  the  highest  point  attained 
by  the  Greeks  in  ascetical  doctrine.  As  the  essays  were  ar- 
ranged by  his  pupil  Porphyry  according  to  subject  matter, 
most  of  his  remarks  upon  the  subject  are  collected  in  the  first 
Ennead,  which  treats  of  morals,  though  numerous  passages  in 
other  parts  of  the  work  either  amplify  the  theory  or  its  meta- 
physical background. 

Fundamental  to  the  whole  philosophy  of  Plotinus  is  his  dis- 
tinction between  the  intelligible  and  the  sensible  worlds. 
Like  all  idealists,  Plotinus  posited  another  world  above  the 
one  with  which  his  senses  made  him  acquainted — a  world 
known  by  the  mind  alone,  but  one  which  was,  in  the  fullest 
sense  of  the  term,  the  only  real  world.  In  this  world  he 
located  all  that  was  good  or  beautiful  or  intelligent,  or  that 
had  being.  It  was  the  abode  of  the  gods.  It  was  complete 
and  self-sufficient,  had  need  of  nothing,  was  the  measure  and 
end  of  all  things,  and  was  eternal;  it  was  the  only  reality. 
But  it  was  not  all  of  a  piece :  like  the  Christian  God,  it  was  a 
trinity,  having  three  hypostases  or  principles.  The  lowest  of 
these  was  the  Universal  Soul,  the  second  the  Divine  Intelli- 
gence, and  the  highest  or  first,  the  Good  or  the  One.  The  One 
was  the  principle  "  upon  which  all  depends,  though  it  depends 
upon  nothing  itself."  This  first  principle,  the  Good  or  Ab- 
solute Being  or  the  One,  or  even  God  as  it  is  sometimes  called, 
was  therefore  the  center  upon  which  all  things  were  focused, 
the  end  towards  which  all  things  strove,  even  the  rest  of  the 
intelligible  world  which  was  lower  in  the  hierarchy.  "  The 


128 

Universal  Soul  directs  all  its  activity  towards  the  Supreme 
intelligence  and,  in  a  way,  lives  only  by  it.  Moving  around 
it  and  about  it  according  to  the  laws  of  harmony,  the  Uni- 
versal Soul  attached  its  regards  upon  it,  and  penetrating  into 
its  most  intimate  depths  by  contemplation,  it  thus  beholds  God 
himself.  It  is  in  this  that  the  serene  and  happy  life  of  the 
gods  consists,  which  is  a  life  where  evil  has  no  place.'788  The 
first  principle  was  the  center  of  the  universe,  towards  which 
all  things  were  drawn  by  a  sort  of  Platonic  epo>9 ;  this  first 
principle  was  the  highest  good. 

Sharply  opposed  to  this  intelligible  world  was  the  sensible 
world,  made  up  of  material  things.  Just  as  the  other  world 
was  the  essence  of  the  good,  this  sensible  world  was  the 
essence  of  evil;  as  it  was  one,  this  was  many;  as  it  was 
Being,  this  was  non-Being;  as  it  was  spiritual,  this  was 
material.  This  matter  was  the  visible  sign  of  the  sensible 
world,  as  well  as  being  the  cause  of  its  baseness.  Plotinus's 
denunciations  of  matter  are  numerous.  "  Matter  does  not 
possess  being;  it  is  truly  said  to  be  the  non-being."89  "  The 
nature  of  bodies,  in  so  far  as  it  partakes  of  matter,  is  an 
evil."90  "  The  cause  of  evil  is  therefore  the  presence  of 
matter  in  sensible  things."91  Matter  is  the  mark  of  evil, 
but  its  essence  is  something  else.  "  To  determine  better  the 
nature  of  evil,  we.  may  think  of  it  as  the  lack  of  measure  as 
measure  is  concerned,  as  indetermination  in  regard  to  a  goal, 
as  the  lack  of  form  in  relation  to  the  principle  which  is  crea- 
tive of  form,  as  eternal  need  as  compared  with  that  which  is 
self-sufficient,  as  perpetual  illimitation  and  mutability,  and 
finally  as  absolute  instability  and  indigence.  That  which  is 
the  subject  of  the  form,  the  determination,  the  limitation,  that 

ss  Enn.  I  8}  2.  As  there  is  no  good  English  translation  of  Plotinus, 
this  and  the  following  extracts  are  based  on  the  Greek  text  and  the 
admirable  French  translation  of  Bouillet. 

8»  I  8,  5. 

»oi8,  5. 


129 

which  owes  its  ornaments  to  other  things  and  has  nothing 
good  of  its  own,  that  which  in  relation  to  true  beings  is  only 
a  vain  image,  in  a  word,  the  essence  of  evil  if  such  an  essence 
of  evil  is  possible,  that  is  what  reason  obliges  us  to  recognize 
as  the  first  evil,  as  Evil-in-itself.  The  nature  of  bodies, 
in  so  far  as  it  participates  in  matter,  is  evil;  for  it  has  a 
certain  form,  though  this  form  is  nothing  real  ;  moreover,  it  is 
deprived  of  life,  as  bodies  corrupt  one  another  mutually  ;  they 
are  in  a  perpetual  flux,  contrary  to  the  immutable  nature  of 
essences;  therefore  they  constitute  the  second  evil."92  The 
sensible  world,  then,  is  a  vain  and  inglorious  and  unreal  one, 
and  one  can  already  foresee  a  teaching  that  it  is  to  be 
shunned. 

But  the  earth  itself  is  not  so  bad  after  all  :  the  Universal 
Soul  is  infused  into  it,  and  gives  it  a  certain  amount  of 
beauty.  In  the  essay  on  the  Three  Hypostases,  there  are 
many  eloquent  passages  describing  the  beauty  which  the  world 
thus  receives.  "  The  presence  of  the  Soul  has  made  an  ad- 
mirable whole  out  of  that  which  was  before  an  inert  cadaver, 
earth  and  water,  or  rather  shades  of  matter,  non-being,  an 
object  of  horror  to  the  gods,  as  the  poet  says."93  "If  the 
heaven,  the  sun  and  the  stars  are  gods,  this  is  due  to  the 
presence  of  the  Soul.  It  is  through  this  that  we  ourselves 
become  something;  a  corpse  is  more  vile  than  a  dung-heap."94 
"  Without  a  soul,  every  body  is  but  earth  ;  it  is  the  soul  which 
gives  the  body  its  beauty."95  Elsewhere  it  is  said  that  bodies 
"  become  beautiful  by  participating  in  a  reason  coming  from 


As  this  Universal  Soul  extends  everywhere,  there  is  really 
nothing  absolutely  without  it,  and  therefore  nothing  abso- 
lutely and  utterly  base  ;  everything  which  we  see  about  us  is 

»2  I  8,  3-4. 
»3  V  1,  2. 

64  VI,  2. 

V1,2. 
I  6,  2. 

10 


130 

a  mixture  of  matter  and  soul,  but  the  best  example  of  this 
fusion  of  body  and  soul  is  man  himself.  Man  is  double, 
made  up  of  a  material  body  and  a  soul  "  which  is  a  god  which 
came  from  on  high  to  dwell  in  us."97  This  soul,  therefore, 
is  in  value  far  superior  to  anything  which  we  possess :  "  strip 
it  of  all  that  envelops  it,  regard  it  in  its  purity  and  you 
will  see  how  precious  is  the  essence  of  the  soul,  and  how  far 
superior  it  is  to  every  body."98  Such  being  the  value  of 
the  soul,  one  should  devote  the  greatest  pains  to  its  care,  but 
owing  to  its  very  union  with  the  body,  the  soul  becomes 
impure. 

"  We  would  be  correct  in  saying  that  the  soul  becomes  ugly 
by  mixing  itself  with  the  body  and  matter,  in  uniting  itself 
to  it,  in  inclining  towards  it.  Ugliness  of  the  soul  consists 
in  not  being  pure  and  unalloyed,  as  that  of  gold  is  being 
defiled  with  particles  of  earth."99  Though  the  soul  is  never 
completely  united  with  matter,  but  always  separated  some- 
what from  it,  matter  "  attempts  to  penetrate  into  the  place 
occupied  by  the  soul,  but  all  this  place  is  sacred,  for  nothing 
is  there  deprived  of  the  soul.  Matter,  in  exposing  itself  to 
the  rays  of  the  soul,  is  illuminated  by  it,  but  cannot  receive 
into  itself  the  principle  illuminating  it.  In  fact,  this  latter 
does  not  allow  of  matter,  though  it  be  present,  nor  even  see 
it,  for  it  is  evil.  Matter  darkens  and  enfeebles  the  light 
which  is  shed  upon  it,  for  it  adds  its  own  shadows.  It  gives 
the  soul  occasion  for  generation,  by  offering  free  access  to 
itself:  for  if  matter  were  not  present,  the  soul  would  not 
approach  it.  To  descend  thus  into  matter  is  the  fall  of  the 
soul."100 

Here  is  the  old,  old  story  of  the  fall ;  men  are  now  in  their 
present  unhappy  state  because  they  have  fallen  from  the  glory 

»T  1 2, 6. 

ea  V  I,  2. 

»» I  6, 5. 

100  I  3, 14;  cf.I8,4. 


131 

that  once  was  theirs.  Time  and  time  again  it  has  been  seen 
that  this  doctrine  leads  directly  to  asceticism :  men  should  try 
to  regain  their  primitive  state,  and  to  do  so,  they  must  give 
themselves  over  to  all  sorts  of  ascetic  practices.  But  before 
turning  to  this,  how  did  the  fall  come  about?  Plotinus  is 
very  explicit  in  one  passage.  "  How  does  it  come  about  that 
having  a  divine  nature,  being  issue  from  God,  souls  do  not 
realize  this  or  their  own  value  ?  The  origin  of  their  evil  is 
audacity,  generation,  the  original  diversity,  the  desire  to  be- 
long to  no  one  but  themselves.101  As  soon  as  they  had  tasted 
the  pleasure  of  possessing  an  independent  life,  using  freely  of 
the  power  which  they  had  to  move,  they  advanced  in  the  road 
leading  them  from  their  origin  so  that  now  they  have  arrived 
at  such  an  estrangement  from  God  that  they  do  not  know  that 
they  received  their  life  from  him."102 

Fallen  though  it  may  be,  however,  the  soul  still  remains 
related  to  the  divine,  and  may  return  to  it ;  the  soul  relates  us 
to  the  divine,  and  opens  up  to  us  a  means  of  advancing 
towards  it.  "  Since  the  essence  of  the  soul  is  so  divine  and 
precious,  be  persuaded  that  by  it  you  may  attain  to  God ;  with 
it,  raise  yourself  to  him.  You  do  not  have  to  seek  him  far 
away;  there  are  not  many  intermediaries  between  him  and 
you.  To  attain  to  him,  take  as  your  guide  the  most  divine 
and  loftiest  part  of  your  soul,  the  power  from  which  it  pro- 
ceeds and  by  which  it  touches  the  intelligible  world."103 
There  is  always  a  way,  therefore,  to  return  to  the  state  from 
which  the  soul  once  fell,  "  to  become  again  that  which  it  was 
originally";104  the  soul  supplies  this  means,  but  just  how? 
A  general  answer  is  to  be  given  first.  "  Life  in  a  body  is  in 
itself  an  evil;  but  by  virtue,  the  soul  places  itself  in  the 

101  '<  c  'est-a-dire  le  desire  qui  a  conduit  les  ames  &  se  separer  primi- 
tivement  de  Dieu  et  a  s'unir  aux  corps. " — Bouillet,  Fr.  tr.  of  Plot., 
interpolation,  vol.  iii,  p.  3. 

102V  1,1. 

los  V  1,  3. 

10*12,6. 


132 

good,  by  not  conserving  this  union  with  the  body,  but  by 
separating  itself  from  it."105  But  now  what  is  virtue  ?  and 
just  what  does  he  mean  by  separating  the  soul  from  the  body  ? 

"  Since  evil  reigns  here  below  and  inevitably  dominates 
in  this  world,  and  since  the  soul  wishes  to  nee  evil,  it  is 
necessary  to  flee  from  this  world.  But  what  is  the  way  to  do 
so?  It  is,  according  to  Plato,  to  resemble  God.  We  shall 
succeed  by  regulating  ourselves  according  to  justice,  holiness, 
wisdom  and  virtue  in  general."106  But  by  virtue  he  does 
not  mean  what  he  calls  the  civil  virtues,  prudence,  courage  or 
temperance.  "  These  give  us  a  certain  resemblance  with 
God,  but  it  is  through  virtues  of  a  superior  order  that  we 
become  completely  like  him."107  The  virtuous  man  will 
certainly  exercise  these  inferior  virtues,  but  he  will  transform 
them,  and  will  not  confine  himself  to  these.  He  will  "ad- 
vance to  the  virtues  of  a  superior  order  and  form  himself 
according  to  their  rules.  For  example,  he  will  not  make 
temperance  consist  only  in  being  moderate,  but  he  will  try  to 
separate  himself  more  and  more  from  matter;  he  will  not  be 
contented  with  leading  the  life  of  a  good  man,  as  demanded 
by  the  civil  virtues,  but  will  aspire  to  still  higher,  to  the 
life  of  the  gods.  It  is  they,  and  not  merely  good  men  whom 
we  must  resemble.  To  seek  merely  to  resemble  good  men 
would  be  to  make  an  image  similar  to  another  image.  The 
assimilation  which  we  prescribe  consists  in  taking  a  superior 
being  as  model."108  No,  civil  virtues  are  bodily  affairs,  and 
those  who  would  seek  the  highest  good  should  use  the  soul, 
for  this  is  the  part  of  man  which  approaches  the  nearest 
to  God.  "  The  soul,  which  by  its  nature  is  closer  to  the 
divine  essence  than  the  body,  by  that  very  fact  participates  in 
it  to  a  greater  degree."109  It  is  these  virtues  of  the  soul 

105 1 7, 3. 

ioei2,l;Cf.I8,7. 

10712,1. 

IDS  I  2,  7. 
io»  I  2,  2. 


133 

which  one  must  cultivate,  if  he  is  to  approach  God.  Plo- 
tinus's  interpretation  of  the  story  of  Hercules,  the  patron  god 
of  the  Cynics  and  Stoics,  well  illustrates  his  thought  upon 
this  point.  "  Hercules's  virtue  was  active,  and  because  of 
his  great  qualities  he  was  judged  worthy  of  being  admitted 
to  the  rank  of  the  gods ;  but  as  he  possessed  the  active  virtue 
only,  and  not  the  contemplative  virtue,  he  could  not  be  ad- 
mitted wholly  into  heaven;  therefore,  while  a  part  of  him 
is  in  heaven,  a  part  is  also  in  Hades."110 

But  what  was  the  nature  of  this  true  virtue  ?  how  was  one 
to  learn  it  ?  Plotinus  says  that  "  to  convert  souls  to  God,  to 
elevate  them  to  the  Supreme  Principle,  to  the  One,  to  the 
First,  one  must  reason  with  them  in  two  ways.  In  the  first 
place,  he  must  show  the  baseness  of  the  objects  which  they 
now  esteem,  and  then  he  must  remind  them  of  the  origin  and 
dignity  of  the  soul."111  To  these  two  points,  the  insignif- 
icance of  external  things  and  the  infinite  value  and  dignity 
of  the  soul,  Plotinus  gives  much  attention. 

In  a  long  passage  he  sets  forth  in  veritably  Stoic  terms 
the  truth  that  happiness  does  not  depend  upon  external 
things.112  "  The  wise  man  will  not  make  his  fate  depend 
upon  the  happiness  of  others."11 3  "  It  is  the  duty  of  virtue  to 
improve  upon  the  ordinary  state  of  human  nature  and  to 
lead  it  to  that  which  is  most  beautiful,  elevating  itself  above 
the  opinion  of  the  vulgar.  It  is  beautiful  not  to  cede  to  that 
which  the  vulgar  ordinarily  regard  as  evils."114  In  general, 
"the  world  offers  a  spectacle  of  injustice  and  disorder,  for 
our  nature  is  mortal,  and  we  dwell  in  an  inferior  place."115 
The  sensible  world  is  distinctly  inferior  and  its  goods  should 
therefore  not  be  sought  after. 

noll,12. 
in  V  1,1. 
ii2!4,6ff. 
us  1 4,  7. 
11*  1 4,  8. 
us  I  8,  6. 


134 

"  Though  the  vulgar  man  may  be  rich,  beautiful,  great,  and 
though  he  may  command  all  others,  thus  enjoying  all  the  ter- 
restrial benefits,  it  is  not  necessary  to  envy  him  for  the  deceitful 
pleasures  which  he  derives  from  these  advantages.  The  wise  man 
will  not  possess  them  at  first,  perhaps,  but  if  he  does,  he  will 
diminish  them  of  his  own  free  will,  if  he  has  the  care  for  himself 
which  he  should  have ;  by  a  voluntary  negligence,  he  will  weaken 
and  sully  the  advantages  of  the  body;  he  will  renounce  his  dig- 
nities ;  though  preserving  the  health  of  his  body,  he  will  not  de- 
sire to  be  entirely  exempt  from  illness  and  suffering;  if  he  does 
not  know  these  evils,  he  will  wish  their  acquaintance  in  his  youth ; 
but  when  he  has  arrived  at  old  age,  he  will  not  wish  to  be  bothered 
any  more,  either  by  pains  or  by  pleasures,  or  anything  else,  sad 
or  agreeable,  which  is  relative  to  the  body,  so  as  not  to  be  obliged 
to  give  it  his  attention."116  "  In  fact,  it  would  be  denying  the 
very  essence  of  happiness  to  regard  exterior  objects  as  the  desire 
of  a  virtuous  man/'117  "A  man  cannot  be  wise,  nor  conse- 
quently happy,  as  long  as  he  has  not  yet  succeeded  in  ridding 
himself  of  these  vain  notions,  has  not  completely  transformed 
himself,  is  not  sure  of  being  protected  from  all  evil;  it  is  only 
then  that  he  can  live  without  being  agitated  by  any  fear."118 

On  the  other  hand  is  the  soul,  opposed  to  the  material 
world,  and  without  its  failings ;  it  is  to  the  cultivation  of  this 
that  the  virtuous  man  will  devote  his  attention.  As  the  activ- 
ity of  the  soul  is  associated  with  that  of  the  intelligence,  care 
of  the  soul  consists  in  developing  the  intellect,  and  the  life  of 
the  soul  is  the  intellectual  life.  "  The  perfect,  veritable  and 
real  life  is  in  the  intelligence.'7119  "A  man  has  the  perfect 
life  when  he  possesses,  in  addition  to  the  sensitive  life,  reason 
and  veritable  intelligence."120  "  Keduced  to  intelligence,  the 
soul  sees  its  beauty  increase;  in  fact,  its  proper  beauty  is 
the  intelligence  with  its  ideas ;  it  is  when  it  is  united  with  the 
ne  1 4, 14. 

117  I  4,  11. 

118  I  4, 15. 
H9  14,3. 
120  I  4,  4. 


135 

intelligence  that  the  soul  is  really  isolated  from  all  the 
rest."121  "Thus  intelligence  is  ours,  but  in  the  sense  that 
the  soul  is  intelligent :  for  us,  the  intellectual  life  is  a  superior 
life.  The  soul  enjoys  this  life  when  it  thinks  of  intelligible 
beings,  or  when  the  intelligence  is  active  in  us.  The  in- 
telligence is  at  once  a  part  of  ourselves  and  a  superior  thing 
to  which  we  raise  ourselves."122  We  make  use  of  this 
superior  principle  when  we  direct  the  medium  part  of  our 
being  either  towards  the  superior  world  or  the  inferior 
world.123  "  Men  triumph  over  evil  by  the  aid  of  those  facul- 
ties which  are  not  engaged  in  matter."124  It  is  this  in- 
tellectual life  which  unites  men  to  God.125 

The  man  who  has  a  care  for  his  soul  will  therefore  seek 
to  lead  the  intellectual  life ;  the  virtuous  man  is  the  one  who 
does  do  so.  The  virtuous  man  or  sage  is  recognizable, 
therefore,  by  two  qualities:  his  serenity,  which  is  the  result 
of  his  not  caring  for  external  and  transitory  goods,  and  his 
contemplative  life,  by  which  he  raises  his  soul  to  God.  "  The 
virtuous  man  is  therefore  always  serene,  calm,  satisfied;  if 
he  is  really  virtuous,  his  state  cannot  be  troubled  by  any 
of  the  things  which  we  call  evils."126  This  serenity  is  a 
good  thing  in  itself,  but  its  greatest  value  is  that  it  makes 
possible  the  contemplative  life. 

"  It  is  necessary  that  the  soul  contemplate  the  Universal  Soul ; 
now  in  order  to  raise  itself  to  this  contemplation,  the  soul  must 
be  worthy  of  it  by  its  nobility,  it  must  be  emancipated  from  error 
and  freed  from  the  objects  which  fascinate  the  regard  of  vulgar 
souls,  it  must  be  plunged  into  a  profound  meditation  and  must 
calm  not  only  the  agitation  of  the  body  which  envelops  it  and  the 
tumult  of  the  senses,  but  also  everything  which  surrounds  it. 

121 1 6, 6. 
122 1 2, 1. 

123  I  1,  11, 

124  I  g,  5. 

mi,  2,  4;  8,  7;  4,  16;  V  1,  6;  1,  11;  etc. 
126  I  4, 12. 


136 

Then  may  all  be  calm,  the  earth,  the  sea,  the  air  and  heaven 
itself."127 

This  contemplation  is  the  highest  activity  which  the  soul 
can  perform.  "  The  good  of  the  soul  is  to  remain  united  to 
the  intelligence  to  which  it  is  sister;  its  evil  is  to  abandon 
itself  to  contrary  things.  After  having  purified  the  soul, 
therefore,  it  is  necessary  to  unite  it  to  God:  to  unite  it  to 
God,  it  is  necessary  to  turn  it  towards  him.  .  .  .  The  virtue 
of  the  soul  does  not  consist  in  this  conversion,  but  in  what  it 
obtains  by  this  conversion.  But  what  does  it  obtain? — the 
intuition  of  the  intelligible  world."128  When  carried  to  its 
extreme,  this  contemplation  results  in  ecstacy,  and  thus 
ecstacy  is  the  highest  good  possible  for  man,  for  it  is  union 
with  God.  When  this  is  achieved,  every  lower  activity  of 
the  soul,  and  even  thought  itself  disappears,  for  the  soul  is 
then  united  to  something  which  is  above  thought;  it  has  no 
movement  or  life  or  opinion  or  consciousness ;  it  is  not  even 
any  longer  a  soul  or  a  self,  but  a  pure  and  motionless  rest 
in  God;  it  is  raised  above  beauty  and  virtue  and  knowledge 
into  a  state  of  ecstacy,  of  resignation  into  the  Eternal,  which 
can  only  be  compared  to  drunkenness  or  the  insanity  of 
love.129  Thus  the  soul  is  united  to  the  First  Principle;  God 
not  only  appears  to  it,  but  God  and  the  soul  are  no  longer 
two,  but  an  inseparable  unity;  the  soul  becomes  pure  light, 
free  from  all  heavy  things,  it  becomes  God,  or  rather,  realizes 
that  it  is  God.130  This  state  is  to  be  attained  only  by  a 
renunciation  of  all  things  and  prayer.  "  Let  us  first  invoke 
God  himself,  not  by  pronouncing  words,  but  by  elevating  our 
soul  to  him  in  prayer;  now  the  only  way  to  pray  is  to 
advance  solitarily  towards  the  One  who  is  solitary.  To  con- 
template the  One,  it  is  necessary  to  withdraw  into  one's  own 
conscience,  as  though  into  a  temple,  and  to  remain  there 

i2?V  4, 12. 

128  I  2,  4. 

129V  3,  1;  8,  11;  VI  7,35;  9,  10. 

iso  VI  9,  10;  V  8,  11;  VI  7,  34-35;  9,  9-11. 


137 

tranquil  and  in  ecstacy."131  Porphyry  tells  us  that  his 
master  entered  into  this  ecstacy  four  times  during  the  six 
years  of  their  acquaintance.132 

The  ascetic  character  of  Plotinus's  philosophy  is  already 
obvious.  The  end  and  aim  which  every  man  who  does  not 
wish  to  be  called  "  vulgar  "  should  hold  before  himself  is  to 
turn  away  from  all  the  things  of  the  world,  to  separate  himself 
from  all  material  things  and  especially  from  his  body,  and  to 
seek  union  with  the  divine.  His  philosophy  is  permeated 
with  a  longing  and  striving  after  better  things,  after  self- 
improvement,  but  these  better  things  are  not  things  of  this 
world  at  all,  and  the  criterion  of  self-improvement  is  de- 
tachment from  the  world.  "Plotinus's  moral  system  has  a 
predominatingly  negative  character,"  said  Zeller.133  But  in 
order  to  make  the  nature  of  this  separation  of  soul  and  body, 
and  of  this  striving  for  superior  things,  more  clear,  let  us 
quote,  in  closing,  a  few  more  passages  in  which  these  subjects 
are  dealt  with  more  explicitly. 

"  That  which  constitutes  a  man,  and  especially  a  virtuous  man, 
is  not  the  compound  of  soul  and  body;  as  is  proven  by  the 
power  which  the  soul  has  of  separating  itself  from  the  body,  and 
despising  what  are  ordinarily  called  goods."134 

"  Evils  cannot  be  abolished.  Then  how  can  one  flee  them  ?  It 
is  not  by  changing  place,  says  Plato,  but  by  acquiring  virtue  and 
separating  oneself  from  the  body ;  for  that  is  also  separating  one- 
self from  matter,  since  whatever  is  attached  to  the  body  is  also 
attached  to  matter.  Plato  also  explains  what  it  is  to  be  sep- 
arated from  the  body,  or  not  to  be  separated  from  it,  and  finally 
what  it  is  to  be  near  the  gods:  it  is  to  be  united  to  intelligible 
objects,  for  it  is  to  these  objects  that  immortality  belongs."135 

isi  v  1, 6. 

i32p0rph.  Vit.  Plot.  23.  For  Plotinus's  views  in  regard  to  this 
ecstacy,  see  Zeller,  Philos.  d.  Griechen,  III  2}  pp.  611-19;  Drews,  Plotin, 
pp.  271-90;  for  contemplation,  Drews,  pp.  269-71. 

133  Zeller,  III  2,  p.  599. 

13*14,14. 
135  I  8,  7. 


138 

"Happiness  is  not  found  in  the  life  of  the  vulgar.  Plato  is 
right  in  saying  that  one  must  quit  the  earth  to  rise  to  the  Good, 
and  that  to  become  wise  and  happy,  one  must  turn  his  regard 
towards  the  Good  alone,  seek  to  become  like  it  and  to  lead  a  life 
in  conformity  with  its.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  this  should  suffice 
to  the  wise  man  to  attain  his  end;  and  he  should  no  longer  at- 
tach any  value  to  other  things,  which  are  mere  changes  in  space, 
and  can  add  nothing  to  happiness."136 

"  The  soul  is  evil,  in  so  far  as  it  is  associated  with  the  body  and 
participates  in  its  passions  and  opinions ;  it  becomes  better,  and 
enters  into  possession  of  virtue,  only  when,  instead  of  following 
the  body,  it  thinks  by  itself  (which  is  true  thought  and  consti- 
tutes prudence),  when  it  ceases  to  share  in  its  passions  (which  is 
temperance),  when  it  does  not  fear  being  separated  from  the 
body  (which  is  courage),  and  finally,  when  reason  and  intelli- 
gence command  and  are  obeyed  (which  is  justice).  Without 
danger  of  deceiving  ourselves,  we  may  say  that  the  condition  of 
a  soul  thus  regulated,  a  soul  thinking  of  intelligible  things  and 
remaining  calm,  is  what  is  really  resemblance  with  God:  for 
that  which  is  pure  is  divine,  and  such  is  the  nature  of  divine 
action  that  whatever  initiates  it  already  possesses  wisdom."137 

"  What  shall  we  make  real  temperance  consist  in,  if  not  in  re- 
fusing to  attach  oneself  to  the  pleasures  of  the  body,  and  in  fleeing 
them  as  though  they  were  impure  and  proper  only  for  an  impure 
being?  Does  not  courage  consist  in  not  fearing  death,  which  is 
nothing  other  than  separation  of  soul  and  body  ?  Then  how  could 
he  who  wishes  to  isolate  himself  from  the  body  fear  death? 
Grandeur  of  soul  is  merely  despising  the  things  here  below. 
Finally,  real  prudence  is  thought,  which,  being  detached  from 
earth,  raises  the  soul  to  the  intelligible  world.  A  purified  soul 
becomes  a  form,  a  reason,  an  incorporeal  and  intelligible  essence ; 
it  belongs  wholly  to  the  divinity,  in  whom  is  the  source  of  the 
beautiful  and  all  the  qualities  which  have  an  affinity  with  it."138 

"The  soul  separates  itself  from  the  body  when,  abandonning  the 
various  places  where  it  was  spread,  it  retires  into  itself;  when  it 

136  I  4,  16. 
13T  I  2,  3. 
138  I  6,  6. 


139 

becomes  entirely  foreign  to  the  passions ;  when  it  allows  the  body 
only  those  pleasures  which  are  necessary,  or  adapted  to  cure  it 
from  its  pains,  to  relieve  it  of  its  fatigues,  or  to  prevent  it  from 
becoming  importune ;  when  it  becomes  insensible  to  sufferings,  or, 
if  that  is  not  within  its  power,  when  it  supports  them  patiently 
and  diminishes  them  by  taking  no  part  in  them;  when  it  ap- 
peases anger  as  much  as  possible  ,and  even  supresses  it  entirely, 
if  it  can,  but  if  it  cannot,  its  does  not  participate  in  it  at  all,  but 
leaves  to  the  animal  nature  all  thoughtless  passions,  while  reduc- 
ing them  and  weaking  them  as  much  as  possible;  when  it  is 
absolutely  immune  from  fear,  having  nothing  more  to  be  afraid 
of;  when  it  suppresses  every  sudden  movement,  except  the  nat- 
ural warnings  of  approaching  danger.  Obviously  the  purified 
soul  should  desire  nothing  disgraceful:  in  eating  and  drinking, 
it  will  seek  only  the  satisfaction  of  a  need,  while  remaining  a 
stranger  to  it ;  no  more  will  it  seek  out  the  pleasures  of  love,  or  if 
it  does  desire  them,  it  will  not  go  beyond  that  which  nature  de- 
mands, resisting  every  thoughtless  passion,  and  not  going  beyond 
the  involuntary  impulses  of  the  imagination.  In  a  word,  the  soul 
will  be  pure  of  all  these  passions  and  will  even  wish  to  purify  the 
irrational  part  of  our  being  in  such  a  way  as  to  preserve  it  from 
emotions,  or  at  least  to  diminish  the  number  and  intensity  of 
these  emotions,  and  to  appease  them  by  its  presence."139 

Such  was  the  asceticism  taught  by  Plotinus;  it  may  be 
taken  as  the  clearest  expression  of  what  was  taught  by  the 
entire  Neo-Platonic  school.  But  it  must  not  be  thought  that 
with  Plotinus,  Greek  speculation  came  to  an  end;  on  the 
contrary,  the  Neo-Platonic  school  continued  to  exist  for  over 
two  hundred  years  after  his  time.  His  own  pupil  Porphyry 
continued  to  teach  Neo-Platonism  and  asceticism  after  him; 
Porphyry  was  succeeded  by  Jamblichus,  who  in  his  turn  had 
many  pupils.  Finally,  in  the  fifth  century,  came  Proclus, 
the  last  of  the  Greek  philosophers  worthy  of  mention.  The 
Neo-Platonic  tradition  continued  down  to  the  end  of  the 
Greek  world,  therefore,  and  was  the  last  that  the  Greeks  had 

139  I  2,  5. 


140 

to  say  on  the  subject  of  philosophy  —  though  by  no  means  the 
best.  However,  the  followers  of  Plotinus  added  little  that 
was  new  to  his  system:  the  fundamental  propositions  of  the 
intelligible  and  sensible  worlds,  the  dual  nature  of  man,  and 
the  desirability  of  devoting  all  one's  efforts  to  striving  towards 
the  intelligible  world,  were  retained,  and  continued  to  be  the 
guiding  principles  of  the  philosophy.  Nevertheless,  after 
Plotinus,  the  expressions  of  this  philosophy  became  ever 
weaker  and  more  chaotic  and  confused,  and  more  and  more 
mingled  with  superstitions  and  non-Greek  elements.  The 
leaders  of  the  school  came  from  all  parts  of  the  world  and 
were  not  Greeks  by  blood  at  all,  which  fact  reacted  visibly 
upon  their  thought  ;  in  the  first  chapter  of  the  present  study 
we  saw  also  that  the  revival  of  primitive  Greek  superstitions 
at  this  time  was  so  great  that  Miss  Harrison  has  been  able  to 
quote  Porphyry  and  Jamblichus  to  illustrate  ideas  which 
she  found  behind  the  very  early  rites  of  the  Greeks.  The 
subsequent  development  of  Neo-Platonism  was  merely  a  de- 
generation and  a  watering-out  of  the  thought  of  Plotinus.  In 
the  later  period,  too,  ^Teo-Platonism  took  on  more  and  more  a 
distinctly  religious  coloring;  this  was  particularly  the  case 
after  Jamblichus.140  In  the  course  of  this  development, 
asceticism  came  to  receive  a  constantly  increasing  attention 
from  the  followers  of  the  school:  a  little  must  therefore  be 
said  in  closing  in  regard  to  the  nature  of  this  ascetical  thought. 
Porphyry  continued  to  teach  the  radical  dualism  of  soul 
and  body  which  his  master  had  taught,  and  continued  the 
teaching  that  the  soul  was  what  united  one  to  God:  omne 
corpus  esse  fugiendum,  ui  anima  possit  beaia  permanere  cum 
Deo,  he  is  reported  to  have  said.141  Love  of  God  and  love 
of  body  are  two  incompatible  things;142  fondness  for  one 


,  III  2,  p.  714:  "Der  Neuplatonismus  durch  ihn  zuerst  ganz 
entschieden  in  den  Dienst  der  Eeligion  trat,  und  aus  einer  philosophischen 
Lehre  zu  einer  theologischen  Doctrin  wurde.  Das  gleiche  bestatigt  aber 
auch  die  Geschichte  seiner  Schule,  so  weit  sie  uns  bekannt  ist." 

141  Augustine,  Civ.  Dei,  X  29. 

142  ad  Marc.  14. 


141 

; 

necessarily  excludes  desire  for  the  goods  of  the  other ;  he  who 
seeks  higher  things  must  renounce  the  pleasures  of  the  body 
and  the  desire  for  them,  and  by  philosophical  endeavours 
loosen  the  band  by  which  the  soul  is  chained  to  the  body.143 
All  sensuous  pleasures  are  to  be  resolutely  repressed;  even 
moderate  sexual  indulgence  is  forbidden,144  as  are  the  theater, 
dancing,  horse-races,  and  the  like.145  Especial  emphasis  is 
laid  upon  abstinence  from  flesh  food,  to  which  subject  he 
devoted  a  whole  treatise ;  it  would  be  a  good  thing,  he  thinks, 
if  we  could  do  without  any  food  at  all,  but  since  we  must 
have  it,  we  should  take  only  that  which  is  simplest  and  most 
innocent;146  asceticism  must  be  expressed  not  only  by  a 
mental  withdrawal  from  worldly  interests,  but  also  by  ex- 
ternal acts  which  chastise  the  body.  For  the  body  is  at 
best  merely  a  garment  of  the  soul,  which  one  should  lay  aside 
if  he  is  to  win  the  victor's  crown;  it  is  not  only  base,  a 
hindrance  to  him,  and  irreconcilable  with  higher  aspirations, 
but  it  is  also  positively  injurious,  polluting  one  through  the 
demons  which  adhere  to  it.147  Thus  pollution  again  appears 
in  an  important  role  in  Greek  thought;  as  a  matter  of  fact, 
purifying  virtues  (icaOapTiicai)  are  second  in  Porphyry's  hier- 
archy of  virtues.  First  are  political  virtues ;  then  the  purify- 
ing virtues  by  which  advance  is  made,  which  consist  in  freeing 
oneself  from  earthly  things,  and  which  end  in  apathy ;  third 
comes  the  positive  corollary  of  these  virtues,  namely,  the 
raising  of  the  -soul  to  God;  and  finally  are  the  "paradig- 
matic "  virtues,  those  of  the  vovs  itself.148  Though  purifying- 
virtue  is  not  the  highest,  it  is,  nevertheless,  according  to 
Porphyry,  the  one  most  essential  for  men,  for  it  is  neces- 
sarily preliminary  to  all  the  others,  and  their  foundation.149 

i«  de  Abst.  I  33. 

144  <ze  Abst.  IV  20;  Sent.  34. 

145  de  Abst.  I  33 

146  de  Abst.  IV  20. 

147  de  Abst.  I  31;  II  46. 

148  Sent.  34. 

149  Sent.  34. 


142 

Thus  asceticism,  world-denial  and  world-flight  become  the 
essential  elements  of  a  moral  life. 

Asceticism  holds  an  equally  important  place  in  the  system 
of  Jamblichus.  Like  the  other  ISTeo-Platonists,  he  held  to 
the  dualism  of  the  intelligible  and  sensible  worlds,  located 
the  soul  midway  betwen  the  two,  and  spoke  of  methods  of 
"purification"  by  which  it  might  rise  to  the  higher.  Just 
as  the  soul  might  rise  to  the  rank  of  the  angels,  it  might  also 
fall  to  the  place  of  demons;  in  fact,  the  body  is  once  more 
taught  to  be  the  outward  and  visible  sign  of  the  fact  that  the 
soul  has  fallen  from  a  former  loftier  abode.  But  Jamblichus 
added  nothing  new;  his  ethical  system  is  merely  a  popular 
philosophy  in  the  spirit  of  his  school.150 

Thus  Greek  philosophy  gradually  faded  away.  As  time 
went  on,  Greek  thought  became  vaguer  and  vaguer,  and  more 
and  more  childish  and  superstitious,  and  cared  less  and  less 
for  the  world  of  the  senses,  giving  all  its  attention  to  the 
intelligible  world  and  denouncing  such  things  as  marrying 
and  giving  in  marriage  or  even  eating  and  drinking,  until, 
like  the  grasshoppers  in  Plato's  fable  quoted  above,  it  "  forgot 
and  died,  and  went  to  the  Muses  in  heaven."  But  before  it 
passed  away,  most  of  it  that  was  of  value  had  been  assimilated 
by  the  Christians.  After  the  third  century,  the  intellectual 
leadership  of  the  Greek  world  was  in  their  hands ;  they  then 
took  over  all  that  Hellas  had  to  give  which  was  good;  but 
after  that  time,  Hellas  contributed  nothing  new.  With  Neo- 
Platonism,  therefore,  the  field  which  we  marked  out  for  our 
study  has  been  covered. 

isoZeller,  III  2,  p.  712:  "Im  iibrigen  enthalten  die  zahlreichen  Ueber- 
bleibsel  seiner  ethischen  Abhandlungen  (in  Strobaus'  Florilegium)  kaum 
etwas  anders,  als  eine  popularphilosophische  Moral  im  Geist  seiner 
Schule." 


CONCLUSION 

In  the  preceding  pages,  the  gradual  development  of  Greek 
ascetical  thought  has  been  traced  from  the  early  rites  of  puri- 
fication through  abstinence,  up  to  Platonic  and  Neo-Platonic 
idealism.  The  existence  of  these  primitive  rites  in  early 
Greece  has  been  established ;  it  has  been  shown  how  the  Or- 
phics,  in  pre-Socratic  times,  while  attempting  to  interpret 
these  rites,  developed  theories  in  regard  to  a  dual  world, 
marked  respectively  by  body  and  soul,  taught  the  infinite  su- 
periority of  the  latter,  and  urged  men  to  chastise  their  sinful 
bodies  for  the  good  of  their  souls ;  Plato  accepted  this  dual- 
istic  theory,  and  made  it  the  basis  of  his  philosophy.  Thus, 
the  fundamental  view  of  the  world  which  is  at  the  bottom  of 
Greek  (and  Christian)  asceticism  was  clearly  stated  by  the 
time  of  Plato;  his  successors  had  nothing  to  add  to  this. 
Nevertheless,  the  development  of  asceticism  during  the  age 
following  Plato  was  enormous.  It  has  been  shown  how,  be- 
ginning in  the  first  century  B.C.,  a  wave  of  asceticism  swept 
over  the  whole  Greek  world,  which  became  more  and  more 
powerful  as  time  went  on.  World-flight  and  other-worldli- 
ness  were  the  characteristic  features  of  the  thought  of  decay- 
ing Greece ;  they  were  one  of  the  important  contributions  of 
Hellas  to  Christianity.  This  has  been  shown,  but  before  the 
present  study  is  brought  to  a  close,  a  few  general  remarks 
bearing  upon  the  transference  of  this  asceticism  into  Chris- 
tianity must  be  made. 

In  the  first  place,  it  should  be  pointed  out  that  this  study 
of  Greek  asceticism  has  further  illustrated  the  truth  of  the 
remark  already  made  by  others  that  asceticism  is  not  the  rela- 
tively rare  phenomenon  which  some  have  imagined  it,  but 
that  on  the  contrary,  it  is  an  essential  element  of  every  reli- 

143 


144 

gion.1  According  to  the  classic  views  of  Greek  life,  the 
Greek  religion,  if  any,  should  have  been  free  from  such  tend- 
encies, but  it  has  been  shown  that  even  here,  asceticism  played 
a  considerable  role.  Of  course,  these  tendencies  varied  in 
intensity  at  different  times,  but  they  were  never  wholly  lack- 
ing. The  explanation  of  this  fact  is  to  be  found  in  the  nature 
and  function  of  religion  itself.  Every  society  has  certain 
collective  ideas  and  ideals  in  regard  to  life  and  the  world 
upon  which  its  whole  social  superstructure  is  built,  and  which 
are  its  characterizing  feature ;  if  these  ideals  lose  the  support 
of  men,  the  society  itself  will  perish.  It  is  the  function  of 
religion  to  inspire  men  with  these  ideals.  Now,  these  ideals 
always  require  that  a  man  should  not  devote  his  entire  atten- 
tion to  his  own  material  gain,  but  should  have  some  regard 
for  other  things  of  a  more  distinctly  social  nature ;  these  are 
called  "higher"  things — things  such  as  truth,  justice,  or  the 
glory  of  God,  to  cite  a  few  common  examples.  If  religion  is 
successful  in  its  function,  then,  it  will  lead  men  to  forsake 
their  material  gain  sometimes  for  these  higher  things,  and  a 
very  common  method  for  teaching  them  to  do  this  is  to  insist 
upon  the  lesser  value  of  these  material  gains.  It  is  inevita- 
ble, moreover,  that  in  every  society  some  persons  will  exag- 
gerate this  teaching  and  thus  become  ascetics.  It  is  for  this 
reason  that  asceticism  is  to  be  found  in  all  known  religions. 
In  the  case  of  Christianity,  it  existed  to  a  certain  extent  from 
the  very  start,  but  during  the  early  centuries  these  initial 
germs  were  developed  to  an  enormous  degree.  It  is  in  this 
that  Hellenic  influence  is  observable,  for  at  first  the  asceti- 
cism was  largely  of  Jewish  or  Gnostic  origin. 

In  the  second  place,  a  few  words  must  be  said  upon  the 
determining  causes  of  the  development  of  asceticism.  Little 
attention  has  been  devoted  to  this  problem  in  the  preceding 
pages,  for  an  effort  has  been  made  to  limit  the  discussion  to 

i  Durkheim,  The  Elementary  Forms  of  the  Religious  Life,  pp.  316ff. 
(Eng.  tr.). 


145 

the  question  of  what  Hellenic  asceticism  was,  not  why  it  was ; 
nevertheless  a  few  words  have  necessarily  been  devoted  to  this 
second  question  as  well.  It  has  been  shown  that  asceticism 
seems  to  increase  as  social  and  economic  conditions  in  the 
world  grow  worse.  When  the  world  is  no  longer  able  to 
please  men,  and  they  are  dissatisfied  with  it,  they  frequently 
turn  to  asceticism.  In  every  social  state  there  will  be  some 
persons  who  do  this,  but  in  evil  days,  these  people  will  be  par- 
ticularly numerous :  as  a  society  fails  and  fades  away,  asceti- 
cism will  become  more  noticeable.  Asceticism  has  thus  been 
spoken  of  as  an  "  old  man's  philosophy,"  and  such  it  is  to  an 
eminent,  though  not  to  an  exclusive  degree.  The  reason  for 
this  fact  is  obvious:  the  decay  of  society  is  attributed  to  a 
falling  away  from  the  old  ideals,  so  many  persons  try  to  save 
the  situation  by  making  unusual  efforts  to  remain  true  to 
them.  Thus  the  decadent  Athens  of  the  fourth  century  pro- 
duced Plato,  who  eloquently  urged  a  return  to  the  old  ideals, 
even  at  the  expense  of  the  body.  This  same  Athens  produced 
the  Cynics,  who  differed  greatly  from  Plato  both  in  the  spirit 
and  the  letter  of  their  teaching,  but  who  agreed  with  him  that 
higher  things  should  be  sought  at  the  expense  of  the  body. 
Inversely,  we  find  that  during  the  prosperous  period  follow- 
ing the  conquests  of  Alexander,  asceticism  was  reduced  to  a 
minimum.  But  social  conditions  in  the  Roman  Empire,  and 
particularly  in  the  eastern  part  of  it,  were  especially  well 
adapted  to  the  production  of  ascetic  ideals,  and  the  result  was 
the  great  ascetic  movement  described  in  the  last  three  chap- 
ters. In  spite  of  the  many  blessings  brought  by  the  Romans 
in  the  form  of  stable  government  and  the  like,  society  was 
rushing  to  ruin.  Though  it  was  by  no  means  the  only  one, 
still  it  cannot  be  denied  that  one  of  the  causes  of  this  decay 
was  the  sensual  indulgence  of  the  people ;  they  no  longer  re- 
mained true  to  their  old  ideals,  nor  did  they  find  newer  or 
better  ones.  It  became  obvious  that  if  society  was  to  con- 
tinue to  exist,  men  would  have  to  care  less  for  their  bodily 


146 

pleasures  and  more  for  ideal  things.  Hence  came  the  rise  of 
asceticism.  ~Now  it  was  into  this  world  that  Christianity, 
with  many  other  new  religions,  entered,  bringing  a  message 
of  redemption ;  but  the  only  form  of  redemption  then  possible 
was  through  an  ascetic  idealism.  It  was  only  because  it  pre- 
sented just  such  an  asceticism  that  Christianity  was  able  to 
save  civilization. 

It  therefore  seems  as  though  Christianity  had  been  predes- 
tined to  an  ascetic  character ;  not  only  did  it  need  to  have  that 
quota  of  asceticism  which  is  common  to  all  religions,  but  also 
the  unusually  strenuous  asceticism  demanded  by  the  world 
which  it  entered.  It  is  certain  that  the  early  Christians,  in 
adapting  their  religion  to  the  needs  of  their  age,  did  give  it 
such  a  nature.  But  what  were  the  sources  from  which  they 
derived  their  ascetic  ideals?  The  present  study  has  at- 
tempted to  present  some  of  them,  though  not  by  any  means 
all  of  them.  How  did  the  early  Christians  draw  upon  these 
sources  ?  This  is  a  question  for  another  study,  and  is  beyond 
the  range  of  the  present  one.  What  we  have  attempted  to  do 
is  to  present  some  of  these  sources — the  ascetic  features  of 
the  Greek  world  which  Christianity  entered — and  thus  pre- 
pare the  way  for  a  study  of  this  larger  question. 


147 


VITA 

I,  Joseph  Ward  Swain,  was  born  at  Yankton,  South  Da- 
kota, on  December  16,  1891,  the  eldest  son  of  Henry  Hunt- 
ington  and  Myra  (Olmstead)  Swain.  I  spent  my  childhood 
and  youth,  and  received  my  early  education  in  Dillon,  Mon- 
tana. After  spending  two  years  in  Beloit  College,  at  Beloit, 
Wisconsin,  I  entered  Columbia  College  as  a  junior  in  1910. 
I  received  the  A.B.  degree  from  Columbia  in  1912,  and  at 
that  time  was  elected  to  the  Phi  Beta  Kappa  society.  I  was 
awarded  the  Chanler  Historical  Prize  for  an  essay  on  "  Cal- 
houn  and  the  Annexation  of  Texas."  The  following  year  I 
spent  in  graduate  study  at  Harvard  University,  from  which 
institution  I  received  the  degree  of  A.M.  in  1913.  From 
1913  to  1915  I  was  in  Europe,  studying  especially  at  the 
University  of  Paris,  but  also  carrying  on  private  studies  at 
Leipzig  and  London.  During  both  winters  I  was  regularly 
enrolled  at  the  "  Ecole  Pratique  des  Hautes  Etudes,  Section 
des  Sciences  Religieuses,"  at  the  University  of  Paris ;  at  the 
end  of  the  first  year  I  was  promoted  to  the  grade  of  "eleve 
titulaire,"  and  at  the  end  of  the  second  I  presented  a  disserta- 
tion entitled  "Hebrew  and  Early  Christian  Asceticism." 
Owing  to  the  turmoils  of  war,  the  faculty  have  not  yet  passed 
upon  this  dissertation,  but  in  case  it  is  accepted,  I  shall  receive 
the  grade  of  "eleve  diplome"  of  the  section.  The  year 
1915-16  I  spent  in  graduate  study  at  Columbia.  I  have 
translated  into  English  the  work  of  Professor  Emile  Durk- 
heim,  of  Paris,  entitled  "  The  Elementary  Forms  of  the  Reli- 
gious Life "  (London :  George  Allen  &  Unwin,  Ltd. ;  New 
York:  The  Macmillan  Company,  1915,  pp.  xi-f-456). 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 
BERKELEY 

Return  to  desk  from  which  borrowed. 
This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


N14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

LOAN  DEPT. 

RENEWALS  ONLY— TEL.  NO.  642-3405 
This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or 


Ao 

J 


on  the  date  to  which  renewed.  - 

Renewed  books  are  subject  to  immediate  recall.          1  U    1961        ' 


J»L  2  9  1969  5  ft 


(D3279slO)476B 


General  Library 

University  of  California 

Berkeley 


U.  C.  BERKELEY  LIBRARIES 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


